My blog has moved!

You should be automatically redirected in 3 seconds. If not, visit
http://humanprovince.wordpress.com
and update your bookmarks.

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

The Ministry of Foresight

When I worked at a certain UN organization, I used to make fun of the fact that one of its sections had been renamed the Division of Foresight. But the more time I spend in Beirut, the more I think that the idea isn't such a bad one. After all, there are always ideas about expanding the number of ministerial portfolios, and I think that what Lebanon really needs is a Minister of Foresight.

One can see the lack of long-term vision on a daily basis. The cab driver would rather insist on a double fare and not pick anyone up than take regular fares and fill his car. The landlord would rather have a building full of high-priced empty apartments than a building full of tenants who pay a fair rent. The shopkeeper would rather overcharge a customer once than have his business over the long term. And this extends to all spheres of Lebanese life, political and social. There seems to be an idea that the only way to get ahead is by fucking someone else over. The Lebanese have yet to learn that while you can shear a sheep many times, you can only skin it once.

My landlord, while trying to get out of paying to repair the hot water heater told me this today: "I am Lebanese. You know what this mean? It mean, I know everything." And in a way he's right, because this country is full of people who think they're smarter than everyone else and who want to prove it by screwing everyone else over. You see it in the driving, in business, in social interactions and in everything else.

And while one might argue that the country's instability is responsible for such short-sighted thinking, I'm not so sure it isn't the other way around.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Seeing Israel in Paris

I'm in Paris this week to surprise my good friend for his birthday and see others whom I've been missing lately,  the city herself my friend's unborn baby girl. I was glad to see that while I was going to be here, I could see Amos Oz and David Grossman at the Centre Pompidou.

It wasn't until I arrived that I realized that the reason Grossman and Oz were in Paris in the first place was the Salon du Livre and the fact that this year, Israel was showcased as the guest of honor. I then found out from some Franco-Algerian friends, who accompanied me to the Pompidou event, that there had been a bomb threat and a boycott. (For a good summary in English of the whole thing, check out Lauren Elkin's account.)

The Oz and Grossman event wasn't at all what I was expecting. I knew that it was ostensibly about their literature but assumed that since both authors are politically active, there would be a fair amount of politics involved also. I was looking forward to this, not least because the only books I've read by either author are political non-fiction. There was a fog of politics that floated above the evening but never settled. Since there was no opportunity for questions, the young swooning moderator, who sounded more like a groupie than a literary critic or writer, and the writers themselves were able to keep to the topic of writing and literature.

One effect of this was that the Holocaust was very much present in the talk, but the Palestinians almost not at all. This was a little disappointing to me, because it's hard for me to imagine Palestinian writing (and this may be the fault of wonderful Mourid Barghouti and Mahmoud Darwish) without a heavy Israeli presence. Also, Oz and Grossman seemed very distant and foreign to me, because of the linguistic barrier. For some reason, I was expecting them to speak in English, but instead they spoke in Hebrew, which was translated into French by one of the best interpreters I've had the pleasure of listening to. His voice was soft and exact, and I felt cradled by his cadence. David Grossman was fairly spontaneous but sometimes a little rambling, whereas Oz spoke like a robot but had more interesting things to say. (It's only fair to mention that a lot of Oz's discourse was canned, as I'd already read close to a third of it in various of his books, interviews and articles.)

It was interesting for me to see Israel in this light: as a state like another. Because in Lebanon, Israel is not only not like other states, it's violent and dangerous. We're waiting for the next war, which will likely be even worse than the last one, so it's difficult to empathize with Israel and its people, even if many of them (like Grossman and Oz) have opinions similar to mine. This reminds me of my trip to the West Bank at the end of the war in 2006. Only rarely did I cross over to Jewish Jerusalem or interact with Israelis. I felt shaken by the bombing of Lebanon and almost afraid to see where those bombs were coming from. I now regret not exploring Tel Aviv or visiting Yad Vashem, which I've wanted to see for a long time. But July 2006 was not the time for that kind of a trip; hopefully I'll have another occasion to go in the not-so-distant future. Or even better, perhaps one day I'll be able to make the short drive to the beach in Tel Aviv from Beirut.

Otherwise, and as per usual, I've taken advantage of Paris to do some book shopping. It seems that Avraham Burg's book, which won't be out in English until October, has been released in French already. I'd like to be able to share it with my Anglophone friends in Beirut, but when I saw it used at Gilbert Joseph, I couldn't pass it up. Otherwise, I also found a used copy of Avi Shlaim's The Iron Wall at my favorite English book store here. Other, non-Israel-related, books include Nerval's Voyage en Orient, Paul Morand's New York (a present from Sebastien) and George Corm's L'Europe et l'Orient. I won't be happy until I find used copies of Samir Kassir's Histoire de Beyrouth and Jean Hatzfeld's Stratégie des Antilopes.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

The world in maps

The Middle East Strategy at Harvard blog sometimes publishes some really ridiculous stuff that ought not be taken seriously by anyone. But every once in a while, the administrators of the blog (whose identities remain unknown, to me at least) put something up that's really helpful. This time, it's two maps of the West Bank. To my mind, this one is particularly helpful in understanding why the two-state solution is probably no longer viable (click on image to get larger pdf version):

We often hear about how impossible a one-state solution would be, but maps like this show how close Palestine and Israel already are to being a single state. In any case, what's left of Palestine and is on offer as a Palestinian state isn't much and could never function as an independent state. The quicker we realize this and start working towards peace accordingly, the quicker the violence will end and the quicker we (Jews and Arabs alike) can get to making the Middle East a good place to live again.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Retired US General speaks out against "Israel's crimes"

Via Weiss, the conservative Washington Times surprisingly prints a letter by a retired Army general in Georgia on why the US should stop funding Israel:

At least 20 Palestinians, including four children playing soccer, were killed by the Israeli military in a one-day missile barrage ("Israeli air strikes kill 20," World, Feb. 29). These deaths resulted when Israel retaliated for the death of one Israeli college student from Palestinian rocket fire outside Sderot, Israel, the day before — after Israeli missiles had killed 12 Palestinians on the previous day.

It seems that this seesaw retaliation will never end, not as long as Israel continues its brutal and illegal occupation.

The Senate and House Appropriations subcommittees on state, foreign operations and related programs are preparing to vote on President Bush's $30 billion increase in military aid to Israel, which currently receives approximately $3.3 billion in annual federal aid.

Mr. Bush promised in his State of the Union address that he will end the spending of taxpayer money on "wasteful or bloated" programs. Not only is this additional foreign aid to Israel a "wasteful and bloated" program, but it also is illegal and immoral. It's illegal because Israel uses this military aid in violation of the Arms Export Control Act and Foreign Assistance Act to violate the human rights of Palestinians through its brutal military occupation and siege of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip. It's immoral because the Israeli siege and occupation of Palestinians — and the humanitarian crises they are causing — are enforced with U.S. weapons, making every U.S. taxpayer an accessory to Israel's crimes.

We don't have the money to fix falling bridges in America, but it seems we always have enough money when it comes to Israel.

BRIG. GEN. JAMES J. DAVID

Army (retired)

Monday, March 10, 2008

Paris breaks political impasse in Lebanon

I'd like to offer a solution to the political impasse as presented by a friend of mine in Paris. I've translated it into English for the Anglophone audience, but the original can be found in the comments of the previous post:


The example of Lebanon inspires new political choices for me which consist of fighting to eliminate the presidential office. The revolution did not finish the job; it was necessary to cut off the head of the state; the only president of this country will remain a cheese.



I also think that since Lebanon can't find itself a capable man to rally all the parties behind him, it's making a recruiting error, for because this man doesn't exist, it's necessary to widen the recruitment to other species: animals, vegetables or maybe an object, a machine, something that symbolizes Lebanon, a new totem.

The list is long. What do you think about an octopus, a cedar, a Mercedes, a 4x4, a fork, a chick pea or a lubbia?

I know that N has a preference for donkeys, and maybe that isn't such a bad idea. It's a hardy animal that can carry heavy loads upon its shoulders without ever complaining.

I think you guys need a donkey. It's a noble animal that we must reclaim. Furthermore, that would allow the beginning of a new collection of stickers for parties and colors. I'll trade you my Hezbollah donkey for your Lebanese Forces carrot.

I don't know if my modest contribution will allow the country to get out of this crisis, but if you think it's useful, spread the word, because we never know, the world's going crazy, so let's take it at its word and enjoy it.

Saturday, March 08, 2008

Classy Saudis

Thursday night there was a peaceful protest in solidarity with Gazans on the beach in West Beirut. The events included poetry reading, live music (traditional and hib hob), a painting, candle lighting and finally a traditional Palestinian debke dance performance. The crowd wasn't enormous, but it was a good gathering nonetheless.

Now, I've never known the Lebanese government to be punctual about anything, and especially not about electing a president. But the protest's permit was for until 8 pm, and when the second hand hit 12, the army came down like clockwork to tell the protesters that they had to leave. It seems that the Saudi ambassador, whose apartment is among those lining the overpriced and unlit towers that line the sea, was responsible for such punctuality. I was wondering if he was acting as a member of the rich Gulf residents of Ramlet al-Bayda annoyed with debke music wafting in from the sea or as the Saudi representative who's hostile to Gaza because of Iran's sponsorship of Hamas. I can't say for sure, but I have a feeling that it's probably a bit of both.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

A reminder

The conservative blogosphere is full of armchair quarterbacks and Middle East "experts" (see comments) who are fond of telling us about Arab propaganda and accusing the "MSM" of toeing the "terrorist" line. So from time to time, it's a good idea to drop in on the Israeli side of the beat:

Today's memo from the Israel Defense Forces censorship office:

1. Real-time reports on the exact locations of rocket hits are strictly prohibited. Reports, on delayed-time, of exact locations must always be approved by the IDF Censor.

2. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports of rocket hits at IDF bases and/or strategic installations.

3. The IDF Censor will not authorize reporting on rockets that fell into the Mediterranean Sea.

4. The IDF Censor will not authorize photographs of rockets with identifying marks.

5. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports regarding visits by senior Israel Government officials and IDF officer in southern Israel.

6. The IDF Censor will not authorize information on exploded terrorist ordinance or any other malfunctioning ordinance.

7. Panoramic, wide-angle, etc. photographs of rocket hits are strictly prohibited.

Please ensure that all staff members are aware of the foregoing.

The foregoing does not obviate the obligation to submit to the IDF Censor – prior to publication – of any news item regarding rocket hits or any other subject that must be approved by the IDF Censor.

When complaining about a militant guerilla organization's restrictions on reporting, I think it's only fair to recall that the other side actually has a censorship office.

The danger of precedent

I'm sure someone else has noticed it, but I think it's important to note the dangerous precedent set by the Bush doctrine of preventative war and the ensuing "war on terror." American allies in Turkey and Colombia have taken advantage of this precedent to conduct their own cross-border attacks into Iraq and Ecuador, respectively.

One can empathize with the tough situation that Ankara and Bogotá are in with the PKK and FARC without accepting the idea that they can invade neighboring countries. This is a problem that's endemic in Africa, where terrorist and rebel groups are tools of statecraft used by neighboring regimes to weaken their enemies. So in Khartoum, Chadian and Ugandan rebels are supplied. Addis Ababa supports rebels in Darfur, Asmara supports Somali rebellions in Ogaden, and Kampala returns the Sudanese favor by supporting the South and Darfur against the center in Khartoum. And let's not even bring up central Africa.

Let's hope that South America doesn't break into the same dirty pattern. Although Colombian accusations that Chávez has been supporting FARC and his response that he'd invade Colombia if Bogotá tried the same thing on the Venezuelan border as just happened on the Ecuadorian side are bad news for stability in the region:

[Colombian ambassador] Mr. Ospina said that, in addition to the alleged payment by Mr. Chavez, the information found on the laptops that Colombian troops seized indicated that President Rafael Correa’s government had met several times with the FARC and allowed them to set up permanent bases in Ecuadorean territory. He said Colombia would seek charges against President Chávez at the International Criminal Court.

“There is not the least doubt that the governments of Venezuela and Ecuador have been negotiating with terrorists,” Mr. Ospina said. “Allowing terrorist groups to keep camps on their territory border for the planning and execution of terrorist acts is a crime and a clear violation of international treaties.” Television in Venezuela also broadcast images of tank battalions heading to the border, following a threat by Mr. Chávez on Sunday that Colombia would be inviting war if it carried out an incursion in Venezuela similar to the one on Saturday in a remote Amazonian province of Ecuador that killed 21 guerrillas.

Mr. Chávez’s threat, which included a taunt that Venezuela would use its Russian-made Sukhoi fighter jets to attack Colombia, has been interpreted here as a sign that Mr. Chávez stands ready to defend the FARC, a group classified as terrorists in the United States and Europe that is reported to operate without hindrance along Venezuela’s porous 1,300-mile border with Colombia.

Contrasting the FARC’s image in Colombia as a group that finances itself through cocaine trafficking and abductions and still plants land mines in rural areas, documentaries on state television here in Venezuela portray the FARC as an insurgency born out of efforts to combat Colombia’s moneyed elite.

On his Sunday television program, Mr. Chávez went further by calling for a minute of silence to mourn for Mr. Reyes, the fallen guerrilla leader whose real name was Luis Édgar Devia.

If we add to the Colombian and Turkish examples, the Ethiopians in Somalia, a clear pattern of US allies taking advantage of the doctrine of preventative war becomes clear. So while it's important to note that cross border raids are not new by any means, due to the American invasion of Iraq they've probably become more common and more defensible by US allies the world over.

Tuesday, March 04, 2008

I love you when you're not here

CNN International just aired a press conference with Bush and King Abdullah of Jordan. Most of the statements were platitudes and made no new headway, but there's one thing that I did notice that I hadn't remarked before. Both Bush adn the reporters insisted on calling Abu Mazen "President Abbas." Bush also insisted on saying that a Palestinian state couldn't "look like Swiss cheese." This is the second time I've heard this remark from him. If it's not disingenuous, it's an important caveat to the idea of a two-state solution and has a folksy charm that's much more specific than the adjective "viable" that's often used to describe a future Palestinian state.

Otherwise, the American University of Beirut was full of students wearing black and white Palestinian keffiyehs in support of Gaza today. Interestingly enough, none of the Lebanese students I spoke with seemed to think that their support for their neighbors should extend to the Palestinians who were killed (around 50) or displaced (over 30,000) last year in Nahr el-Bared. They told me that the government had the right to go in and destroy the camp in order to root out the terrorists. When I asked them what the difference was between that and when Israelis use almost identical rhetoric, they insisted that the two situations had nothing in common. One student insisted that Palestinians didn't deserve any rights in Lebanon.

As usual, Lebanese solidarity with Palestinians seems to be more about opposing Israel than supporting Palestinians. Ya haram.

Saturday, March 01, 2008

Israel threatens Gazans with a "shoah"

I spend a lot of time getting annoyed when people throw around the word "genocide" or "holocaust" when it's not warranted. This often means rebuking Lebanese and Palestinian friends who want to call the Israeli occupation a genocide. The occupation is a lot of things, none of them savory, but a genocide it is not, and calling it one cheapens the word.

So you can imagine my surprise when I saw last night that Israel's deputy defense minister, Matan Vilnai, had threatened Palestinians in Gaza with a "shoah":

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - A senior Israeli defense official said on Friday that Palestinians firing rockets from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip would bring upon themselves what he termed a "shoah," the Hebrew word for holocaust or disaster.

The word is rarely used in Israel outside discussions of the Nazi Holocaust of Jews. Many Israelis are loath to countenance its use to describe other contemporary events. Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said the Palestinians faced "new Nazis."

Israeli air strikes have killed at least 33 Gazans, including five children, in the past two days. The army, which carried out additional air strikes on Friday, said most of those killed were militants.

I'm no Hebraist, but according to Reuters and common sense, "shoah," like "holocaust" isn't a word that's tossed around lightly in Israel. And whenever there's a comment by someone like Ahmadinejad, quoting Khomeini, saying that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time," we get Israel supporters clamoring for the world to denounce the genocidal intent of the Iranian regime. So will these same people condemn Israel's even more explicit language?

Just the other day on the Olin Institute's Middle Eastern Strategy at Harvard blog, Stephen Peter Rosen was making a fuss about a comment that Ahmadinejad made calling Israel a "black and dirty microbe," informing us that this change in discourse could be "associated with biological attacks or other unconventional mass killings." 

So since Rosen says that he's interested in tracking the discourse between Israel and Iran, I can imagine that the Harvard blog will soon have a post up warning of the impending "shoah" to be visited upon the Gazans. After all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

Of course not. If we look a the comments to Rosen's post, we're given the simple answer by Harvard's specialist on Armenia, James Russell, that "Ahmadinejad and Hezbollah are obviously murderous and crazy." I knew there was a simple answer!

UPDATE: Melanie Phillips at the Spectator is now claiming that "In Hebrew, the word ‘shoah’ is never used to mean ‘holocaust’ or ‘genocide’ because of the acute historical resonance." (Italics hers.) Someone should get Claude Lanzmann on the phone to let him know he's made a terrible mistake.

And for the record, the Israeli daily Ha'aretz has this to say about the remark:

Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai went as far as threatening a "shoah," the Hebrew word for holocaust or disaster. The word is generally used to refer to the Nazi Holocaust, but a spokesman for Vilnai said the deputy defense minister used the word in the sense of "disaster," saying "he did not mean to make any allusion to the genocide."

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

The Ministry of Foresight

When I worked at a certain UN organization, I used to make fun of the fact that one of its sections had been renamed the Division of Foresight. But the more time I spend in Beirut, the more I think that the idea isn't such a bad one. After all, there are always ideas about expanding the number of ministerial portfolios, and I think that what Lebanon really needs is a Minister of Foresight.

One can see the lack of long-term vision on a daily basis. The cab driver would rather insist on a double fare and not pick anyone up than take regular fares and fill his car. The landlord would rather have a building full of high-priced empty apartments than a building full of tenants who pay a fair rent. The shopkeeper would rather overcharge a customer once than have his business over the long term. And this extends to all spheres of Lebanese life, political and social. There seems to be an idea that the only way to get ahead is by fucking someone else over. The Lebanese have yet to learn that while you can shear a sheep many times, you can only skin it once.

My landlord, while trying to get out of paying to repair the hot water heater told me this today: "I am Lebanese. You know what this mean? It mean, I know everything." And in a way he's right, because this country is full of people who think they're smarter than everyone else and who want to prove it by screwing everyone else over. You see it in the driving, in business, in social interactions and in everything else.

And while one might argue that the country's instability is responsible for such short-sighted thinking, I'm not so sure it isn't the other way around.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Seeing Israel in Paris

I'm in Paris this week to surprise my good friend for his birthday and see others whom I've been missing lately,  the city herself my friend's unborn baby girl. I was glad to see that while I was going to be here, I could see Amos Oz and David Grossman at the Centre Pompidou.

It wasn't until I arrived that I realized that the reason Grossman and Oz were in Paris in the first place was the Salon du Livre and the fact that this year, Israel was showcased as the guest of honor. I then found out from some Franco-Algerian friends, who accompanied me to the Pompidou event, that there had been a bomb threat and a boycott. (For a good summary in English of the whole thing, check out Lauren Elkin's account.)

The Oz and Grossman event wasn't at all what I was expecting. I knew that it was ostensibly about their literature but assumed that since both authors are politically active, there would be a fair amount of politics involved also. I was looking forward to this, not least because the only books I've read by either author are political non-fiction. There was a fog of politics that floated above the evening but never settled. Since there was no opportunity for questions, the young swooning moderator, who sounded more like a groupie than a literary critic or writer, and the writers themselves were able to keep to the topic of writing and literature.

One effect of this was that the Holocaust was very much present in the talk, but the Palestinians almost not at all. This was a little disappointing to me, because it's hard for me to imagine Palestinian writing (and this may be the fault of wonderful Mourid Barghouti and Mahmoud Darwish) without a heavy Israeli presence. Also, Oz and Grossman seemed very distant and foreign to me, because of the linguistic barrier. For some reason, I was expecting them to speak in English, but instead they spoke in Hebrew, which was translated into French by one of the best interpreters I've had the pleasure of listening to. His voice was soft and exact, and I felt cradled by his cadence. David Grossman was fairly spontaneous but sometimes a little rambling, whereas Oz spoke like a robot but had more interesting things to say. (It's only fair to mention that a lot of Oz's discourse was canned, as I'd already read close to a third of it in various of his books, interviews and articles.)

It was interesting for me to see Israel in this light: as a state like another. Because in Lebanon, Israel is not only not like other states, it's violent and dangerous. We're waiting for the next war, which will likely be even worse than the last one, so it's difficult to empathize with Israel and its people, even if many of them (like Grossman and Oz) have opinions similar to mine. This reminds me of my trip to the West Bank at the end of the war in 2006. Only rarely did I cross over to Jewish Jerusalem or interact with Israelis. I felt shaken by the bombing of Lebanon and almost afraid to see where those bombs were coming from. I now regret not exploring Tel Aviv or visiting Yad Vashem, which I've wanted to see for a long time. But July 2006 was not the time for that kind of a trip; hopefully I'll have another occasion to go in the not-so-distant future. Or even better, perhaps one day I'll be able to make the short drive to the beach in Tel Aviv from Beirut.

Otherwise, and as per usual, I've taken advantage of Paris to do some book shopping. It seems that Avraham Burg's book, which won't be out in English until October, has been released in French already. I'd like to be able to share it with my Anglophone friends in Beirut, but when I saw it used at Gilbert Joseph, I couldn't pass it up. Otherwise, I also found a used copy of Avi Shlaim's The Iron Wall at my favorite English book store here. Other, non-Israel-related, books include Nerval's Voyage en Orient, Paul Morand's New York (a present from Sebastien) and George Corm's L'Europe et l'Orient. I won't be happy until I find used copies of Samir Kassir's Histoire de Beyrouth and Jean Hatzfeld's Stratégie des Antilopes.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

The world in maps

The Middle East Strategy at Harvard blog sometimes publishes some really ridiculous stuff that ought not be taken seriously by anyone. But every once in a while, the administrators of the blog (whose identities remain unknown, to me at least) put something up that's really helpful. This time, it's two maps of the West Bank. To my mind, this one is particularly helpful in understanding why the two-state solution is probably no longer viable (click on image to get larger pdf version):

We often hear about how impossible a one-state solution would be, but maps like this show how close Palestine and Israel already are to being a single state. In any case, what's left of Palestine and is on offer as a Palestinian state isn't much and could never function as an independent state. The quicker we realize this and start working towards peace accordingly, the quicker the violence will end and the quicker we (Jews and Arabs alike) can get to making the Middle East a good place to live again.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Retired US General speaks out against "Israel's crimes"

Via Weiss, the conservative Washington Times surprisingly prints a letter by a retired Army general in Georgia on why the US should stop funding Israel:

At least 20 Palestinians, including four children playing soccer, were killed by the Israeli military in a one-day missile barrage ("Israeli air strikes kill 20," World, Feb. 29). These deaths resulted when Israel retaliated for the death of one Israeli college student from Palestinian rocket fire outside Sderot, Israel, the day before — after Israeli missiles had killed 12 Palestinians on the previous day.

It seems that this seesaw retaliation will never end, not as long as Israel continues its brutal and illegal occupation.

The Senate and House Appropriations subcommittees on state, foreign operations and related programs are preparing to vote on President Bush's $30 billion increase in military aid to Israel, which currently receives approximately $3.3 billion in annual federal aid.

Mr. Bush promised in his State of the Union address that he will end the spending of taxpayer money on "wasteful or bloated" programs. Not only is this additional foreign aid to Israel a "wasteful and bloated" program, but it also is illegal and immoral. It's illegal because Israel uses this military aid in violation of the Arms Export Control Act and Foreign Assistance Act to violate the human rights of Palestinians through its brutal military occupation and siege of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip. It's immoral because the Israeli siege and occupation of Palestinians — and the humanitarian crises they are causing — are enforced with U.S. weapons, making every U.S. taxpayer an accessory to Israel's crimes.

We don't have the money to fix falling bridges in America, but it seems we always have enough money when it comes to Israel.

BRIG. GEN. JAMES J. DAVID

Army (retired)

Monday, March 10, 2008

Paris breaks political impasse in Lebanon

I'd like to offer a solution to the political impasse as presented by a friend of mine in Paris. I've translated it into English for the Anglophone audience, but the original can be found in the comments of the previous post:


The example of Lebanon inspires new political choices for me which consist of fighting to eliminate the presidential office. The revolution did not finish the job; it was necessary to cut off the head of the state; the only president of this country will remain a cheese.



I also think that since Lebanon can't find itself a capable man to rally all the parties behind him, it's making a recruiting error, for because this man doesn't exist, it's necessary to widen the recruitment to other species: animals, vegetables or maybe an object, a machine, something that symbolizes Lebanon, a new totem.

The list is long. What do you think about an octopus, a cedar, a Mercedes, a 4x4, a fork, a chick pea or a lubbia?

I know that N has a preference for donkeys, and maybe that isn't such a bad idea. It's a hardy animal that can carry heavy loads upon its shoulders without ever complaining.

I think you guys need a donkey. It's a noble animal that we must reclaim. Furthermore, that would allow the beginning of a new collection of stickers for parties and colors. I'll trade you my Hezbollah donkey for your Lebanese Forces carrot.

I don't know if my modest contribution will allow the country to get out of this crisis, but if you think it's useful, spread the word, because we never know, the world's going crazy, so let's take it at its word and enjoy it.

Saturday, March 08, 2008

Classy Saudis

Thursday night there was a peaceful protest in solidarity with Gazans on the beach in West Beirut. The events included poetry reading, live music (traditional and hib hob), a painting, candle lighting and finally a traditional Palestinian debke dance performance. The crowd wasn't enormous, but it was a good gathering nonetheless.

Now, I've never known the Lebanese government to be punctual about anything, and especially not about electing a president. But the protest's permit was for until 8 pm, and when the second hand hit 12, the army came down like clockwork to tell the protesters that they had to leave. It seems that the Saudi ambassador, whose apartment is among those lining the overpriced and unlit towers that line the sea, was responsible for such punctuality. I was wondering if he was acting as a member of the rich Gulf residents of Ramlet al-Bayda annoyed with debke music wafting in from the sea or as the Saudi representative who's hostile to Gaza because of Iran's sponsorship of Hamas. I can't say for sure, but I have a feeling that it's probably a bit of both.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

A reminder

The conservative blogosphere is full of armchair quarterbacks and Middle East "experts" (see comments) who are fond of telling us about Arab propaganda and accusing the "MSM" of toeing the "terrorist" line. So from time to time, it's a good idea to drop in on the Israeli side of the beat:

Today's memo from the Israel Defense Forces censorship office:

1. Real-time reports on the exact locations of rocket hits are strictly prohibited. Reports, on delayed-time, of exact locations must always be approved by the IDF Censor.

2. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports of rocket hits at IDF bases and/or strategic installations.

3. The IDF Censor will not authorize reporting on rockets that fell into the Mediterranean Sea.

4. The IDF Censor will not authorize photographs of rockets with identifying marks.

5. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports regarding visits by senior Israel Government officials and IDF officer in southern Israel.

6. The IDF Censor will not authorize information on exploded terrorist ordinance or any other malfunctioning ordinance.

7. Panoramic, wide-angle, etc. photographs of rocket hits are strictly prohibited.

Please ensure that all staff members are aware of the foregoing.

The foregoing does not obviate the obligation to submit to the IDF Censor – prior to publication – of any news item regarding rocket hits or any other subject that must be approved by the IDF Censor.

When complaining about a militant guerilla organization's restrictions on reporting, I think it's only fair to recall that the other side actually has a censorship office.

The danger of precedent

I'm sure someone else has noticed it, but I think it's important to note the dangerous precedent set by the Bush doctrine of preventative war and the ensuing "war on terror." American allies in Turkey and Colombia have taken advantage of this precedent to conduct their own cross-border attacks into Iraq and Ecuador, respectively.

One can empathize with the tough situation that Ankara and Bogotá are in with the PKK and FARC without accepting the idea that they can invade neighboring countries. This is a problem that's endemic in Africa, where terrorist and rebel groups are tools of statecraft used by neighboring regimes to weaken their enemies. So in Khartoum, Chadian and Ugandan rebels are supplied. Addis Ababa supports rebels in Darfur, Asmara supports Somali rebellions in Ogaden, and Kampala returns the Sudanese favor by supporting the South and Darfur against the center in Khartoum. And let's not even bring up central Africa.

Let's hope that South America doesn't break into the same dirty pattern. Although Colombian accusations that Chávez has been supporting FARC and his response that he'd invade Colombia if Bogotá tried the same thing on the Venezuelan border as just happened on the Ecuadorian side are bad news for stability in the region:

[Colombian ambassador] Mr. Ospina said that, in addition to the alleged payment by Mr. Chavez, the information found on the laptops that Colombian troops seized indicated that President Rafael Correa’s government had met several times with the FARC and allowed them to set up permanent bases in Ecuadorean territory. He said Colombia would seek charges against President Chávez at the International Criminal Court.

“There is not the least doubt that the governments of Venezuela and Ecuador have been negotiating with terrorists,” Mr. Ospina said. “Allowing terrorist groups to keep camps on their territory border for the planning and execution of terrorist acts is a crime and a clear violation of international treaties.” Television in Venezuela also broadcast images of tank battalions heading to the border, following a threat by Mr. Chávez on Sunday that Colombia would be inviting war if it carried out an incursion in Venezuela similar to the one on Saturday in a remote Amazonian province of Ecuador that killed 21 guerrillas.

Mr. Chávez’s threat, which included a taunt that Venezuela would use its Russian-made Sukhoi fighter jets to attack Colombia, has been interpreted here as a sign that Mr. Chávez stands ready to defend the FARC, a group classified as terrorists in the United States and Europe that is reported to operate without hindrance along Venezuela’s porous 1,300-mile border with Colombia.

Contrasting the FARC’s image in Colombia as a group that finances itself through cocaine trafficking and abductions and still plants land mines in rural areas, documentaries on state television here in Venezuela portray the FARC as an insurgency born out of efforts to combat Colombia’s moneyed elite.

On his Sunday television program, Mr. Chávez went further by calling for a minute of silence to mourn for Mr. Reyes, the fallen guerrilla leader whose real name was Luis Édgar Devia.

If we add to the Colombian and Turkish examples, the Ethiopians in Somalia, a clear pattern of US allies taking advantage of the doctrine of preventative war becomes clear. So while it's important to note that cross border raids are not new by any means, due to the American invasion of Iraq they've probably become more common and more defensible by US allies the world over.

Tuesday, March 04, 2008

I love you when you're not here

CNN International just aired a press conference with Bush and King Abdullah of Jordan. Most of the statements were platitudes and made no new headway, but there's one thing that I did notice that I hadn't remarked before. Both Bush adn the reporters insisted on calling Abu Mazen "President Abbas." Bush also insisted on saying that a Palestinian state couldn't "look like Swiss cheese." This is the second time I've heard this remark from him. If it's not disingenuous, it's an important caveat to the idea of a two-state solution and has a folksy charm that's much more specific than the adjective "viable" that's often used to describe a future Palestinian state.

Otherwise, the American University of Beirut was full of students wearing black and white Palestinian keffiyehs in support of Gaza today. Interestingly enough, none of the Lebanese students I spoke with seemed to think that their support for their neighbors should extend to the Palestinians who were killed (around 50) or displaced (over 30,000) last year in Nahr el-Bared. They told me that the government had the right to go in and destroy the camp in order to root out the terrorists. When I asked them what the difference was between that and when Israelis use almost identical rhetoric, they insisted that the two situations had nothing in common. One student insisted that Palestinians didn't deserve any rights in Lebanon.

As usual, Lebanese solidarity with Palestinians seems to be more about opposing Israel than supporting Palestinians. Ya haram.

Saturday, March 01, 2008

Israel threatens Gazans with a "shoah"

I spend a lot of time getting annoyed when people throw around the word "genocide" or "holocaust" when it's not warranted. This often means rebuking Lebanese and Palestinian friends who want to call the Israeli occupation a genocide. The occupation is a lot of things, none of them savory, but a genocide it is not, and calling it one cheapens the word.

So you can imagine my surprise when I saw last night that Israel's deputy defense minister, Matan Vilnai, had threatened Palestinians in Gaza with a "shoah":

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - A senior Israeli defense official said on Friday that Palestinians firing rockets from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip would bring upon themselves what he termed a "shoah," the Hebrew word for holocaust or disaster.

The word is rarely used in Israel outside discussions of the Nazi Holocaust of Jews. Many Israelis are loath to countenance its use to describe other contemporary events. Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said the Palestinians faced "new Nazis."

Israeli air strikes have killed at least 33 Gazans, including five children, in the past two days. The army, which carried out additional air strikes on Friday, said most of those killed were militants.

I'm no Hebraist, but according to Reuters and common sense, "shoah," like "holocaust" isn't a word that's tossed around lightly in Israel. And whenever there's a comment by someone like Ahmadinejad, quoting Khomeini, saying that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time," we get Israel supporters clamoring for the world to denounce the genocidal intent of the Iranian regime. So will these same people condemn Israel's even more explicit language?

Just the other day on the Olin Institute's Middle Eastern Strategy at Harvard blog, Stephen Peter Rosen was making a fuss about a comment that Ahmadinejad made calling Israel a "black and dirty microbe," informing us that this change in discourse could be "associated with biological attacks or other unconventional mass killings." 

So since Rosen says that he's interested in tracking the discourse between Israel and Iran, I can imagine that the Harvard blog will soon have a post up warning of the impending "shoah" to be visited upon the Gazans. After all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

Of course not. If we look a the comments to Rosen's post, we're given the simple answer by Harvard's specialist on Armenia, James Russell, that "Ahmadinejad and Hezbollah are obviously murderous and crazy." I knew there was a simple answer!

UPDATE: Melanie Phillips at the Spectator is now claiming that "In Hebrew, the word ‘shoah’ is never used to mean ‘holocaust’ or ‘genocide’ because of the acute historical resonance." (Italics hers.) Someone should get Claude Lanzmann on the phone to let him know he's made a terrible mistake.

And for the record, the Israeli daily Ha'aretz has this to say about the remark:

Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai went as far as threatening a "shoah," the Hebrew word for holocaust or disaster. The word is generally used to refer to the Nazi Holocaust, but a spokesman for Vilnai said the deputy defense minister used the word in the sense of "disaster," saying "he did not mean to make any allusion to the genocide."

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

The Ministry of Foresight

When I worked at a certain UN organization, I used to make fun of the fact that one of its sections had been renamed the Division of Foresight. But the more time I spend in Beirut, the more I think that the idea isn't such a bad one. After all, there are always ideas about expanding the number of ministerial portfolios, and I think that what Lebanon really needs is a Minister of Foresight.

One can see the lack of long-term vision on a daily basis. The cab driver would rather insist on a double fare and not pick anyone up than take regular fares and fill his car. The landlord would rather have a building full of high-priced empty apartments than a building full of tenants who pay a fair rent. The shopkeeper would rather overcharge a customer once than have his business over the long term. And this extends to all spheres of Lebanese life, political and social. There seems to be an idea that the only way to get ahead is by fucking someone else over. The Lebanese have yet to learn that while you can shear a sheep many times, you can only skin it once.

My landlord, while trying to get out of paying to repair the hot water heater told me this today: "I am Lebanese. You know what this mean? It mean, I know everything." And in a way he's right, because this country is full of people who think they're smarter than everyone else and who want to prove it by screwing everyone else over. You see it in the driving, in business, in social interactions and in everything else.

And while one might argue that the country's instability is responsible for such short-sighted thinking, I'm not so sure it isn't the other way around.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Seeing Israel in Paris

I'm in Paris this week to surprise my good friend for his birthday and see others whom I've been missing lately,  the city herself my friend's unborn baby girl. I was glad to see that while I was going to be here, I could see Amos Oz and David Grossman at the Centre Pompidou.

It wasn't until I arrived that I realized that the reason Grossman and Oz were in Paris in the first place was the Salon du Livre and the fact that this year, Israel was showcased as the guest of honor. I then found out from some Franco-Algerian friends, who accompanied me to the Pompidou event, that there had been a bomb threat and a boycott. (For a good summary in English of the whole thing, check out Lauren Elkin's account.)

The Oz and Grossman event wasn't at all what I was expecting. I knew that it was ostensibly about their literature but assumed that since both authors are politically active, there would be a fair amount of politics involved also. I was looking forward to this, not least because the only books I've read by either author are political non-fiction. There was a fog of politics that floated above the evening but never settled. Since there was no opportunity for questions, the young swooning moderator, who sounded more like a groupie than a literary critic or writer, and the writers themselves were able to keep to the topic of writing and literature.

One effect of this was that the Holocaust was very much present in the talk, but the Palestinians almost not at all. This was a little disappointing to me, because it's hard for me to imagine Palestinian writing (and this may be the fault of wonderful Mourid Barghouti and Mahmoud Darwish) without a heavy Israeli presence. Also, Oz and Grossman seemed very distant and foreign to me, because of the linguistic barrier. For some reason, I was expecting them to speak in English, but instead they spoke in Hebrew, which was translated into French by one of the best interpreters I've had the pleasure of listening to. His voice was soft and exact, and I felt cradled by his cadence. David Grossman was fairly spontaneous but sometimes a little rambling, whereas Oz spoke like a robot but had more interesting things to say. (It's only fair to mention that a lot of Oz's discourse was canned, as I'd already read close to a third of it in various of his books, interviews and articles.)

It was interesting for me to see Israel in this light: as a state like another. Because in Lebanon, Israel is not only not like other states, it's violent and dangerous. We're waiting for the next war, which will likely be even worse than the last one, so it's difficult to empathize with Israel and its people, even if many of them (like Grossman and Oz) have opinions similar to mine. This reminds me of my trip to the West Bank at the end of the war in 2006. Only rarely did I cross over to Jewish Jerusalem or interact with Israelis. I felt shaken by the bombing of Lebanon and almost afraid to see where those bombs were coming from. I now regret not exploring Tel Aviv or visiting Yad Vashem, which I've wanted to see for a long time. But July 2006 was not the time for that kind of a trip; hopefully I'll have another occasion to go in the not-so-distant future. Or even better, perhaps one day I'll be able to make the short drive to the beach in Tel Aviv from Beirut.

Otherwise, and as per usual, I've taken advantage of Paris to do some book shopping. It seems that Avraham Burg's book, which won't be out in English until October, has been released in French already. I'd like to be able to share it with my Anglophone friends in Beirut, but when I saw it used at Gilbert Joseph, I couldn't pass it up. Otherwise, I also found a used copy of Avi Shlaim's The Iron Wall at my favorite English book store here. Other, non-Israel-related, books include Nerval's Voyage en Orient, Paul Morand's New York (a present from Sebastien) and George Corm's L'Europe et l'Orient. I won't be happy until I find used copies of Samir Kassir's Histoire de Beyrouth and Jean Hatzfeld's Stratégie des Antilopes.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

The world in maps

The Middle East Strategy at Harvard blog sometimes publishes some really ridiculous stuff that ought not be taken seriously by anyone. But every once in a while, the administrators of the blog (whose identities remain unknown, to me at least) put something up that's really helpful. This time, it's two maps of the West Bank. To my mind, this one is particularly helpful in understanding why the two-state solution is probably no longer viable (click on image to get larger pdf version):

We often hear about how impossible a one-state solution would be, but maps like this show how close Palestine and Israel already are to being a single state. In any case, what's left of Palestine and is on offer as a Palestinian state isn't much and could never function as an independent state. The quicker we realize this and start working towards peace accordingly, the quicker the violence will end and the quicker we (Jews and Arabs alike) can get to making the Middle East a good place to live again.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Retired US General speaks out against "Israel's crimes"

Via Weiss, the conservative Washington Times surprisingly prints a letter by a retired Army general in Georgia on why the US should stop funding Israel:

At least 20 Palestinians, including four children playing soccer, were killed by the Israeli military in a one-day missile barrage ("Israeli air strikes kill 20," World, Feb. 29). These deaths resulted when Israel retaliated for the death of one Israeli college student from Palestinian rocket fire outside Sderot, Israel, the day before — after Israeli missiles had killed 12 Palestinians on the previous day.

It seems that this seesaw retaliation will never end, not as long as Israel continues its brutal and illegal occupation.

The Senate and House Appropriations subcommittees on state, foreign operations and related programs are preparing to vote on President Bush's $30 billion increase in military aid to Israel, which currently receives approximately $3.3 billion in annual federal aid.

Mr. Bush promised in his State of the Union address that he will end the spending of taxpayer money on "wasteful or bloated" programs. Not only is this additional foreign aid to Israel a "wasteful and bloated" program, but it also is illegal and immoral. It's illegal because Israel uses this military aid in violation of the Arms Export Control Act and Foreign Assistance Act to violate the human rights of Palestinians through its brutal military occupation and siege of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip. It's immoral because the Israeli siege and occupation of Palestinians — and the humanitarian crises they are causing — are enforced with U.S. weapons, making every U.S. taxpayer an accessory to Israel's crimes.

We don't have the money to fix falling bridges in America, but it seems we always have enough money when it comes to Israel.

BRIG. GEN. JAMES J. DAVID

Army (retired)

Monday, March 10, 2008

Paris breaks political impasse in Lebanon

I'd like to offer a solution to the political impasse as presented by a friend of mine in Paris. I've translated it into English for the Anglophone audience, but the original can be found in the comments of the previous post:


The example of Lebanon inspires new political choices for me which consist of fighting to eliminate the presidential office. The revolution did not finish the job; it was necessary to cut off the head of the state; the only president of this country will remain a cheese.



I also think that since Lebanon can't find itself a capable man to rally all the parties behind him, it's making a recruiting error, for because this man doesn't exist, it's necessary to widen the recruitment to other species: animals, vegetables or maybe an object, a machine, something that symbolizes Lebanon, a new totem.

The list is long. What do you think about an octopus, a cedar, a Mercedes, a 4x4, a fork, a chick pea or a lubbia?

I know that N has a preference for donkeys, and maybe that isn't such a bad idea. It's a hardy animal that can carry heavy loads upon its shoulders without ever complaining.

I think you guys need a donkey. It's a noble animal that we must reclaim. Furthermore, that would allow the beginning of a new collection of stickers for parties and colors. I'll trade you my Hezbollah donkey for your Lebanese Forces carrot.

I don't know if my modest contribution will allow the country to get out of this crisis, but if you think it's useful, spread the word, because we never know, the world's going crazy, so let's take it at its word and enjoy it.

Saturday, March 08, 2008

Classy Saudis

Thursday night there was a peaceful protest in solidarity with Gazans on the beach in West Beirut. The events included poetry reading, live music (traditional and hib hob), a painting, candle lighting and finally a traditional Palestinian debke dance performance. The crowd wasn't enormous, but it was a good gathering nonetheless.

Now, I've never known the Lebanese government to be punctual about anything, and especially not about electing a president. But the protest's permit was for until 8 pm, and when the second hand hit 12, the army came down like clockwork to tell the protesters that they had to leave. It seems that the Saudi ambassador, whose apartment is among those lining the overpriced and unlit towers that line the sea, was responsible for such punctuality. I was wondering if he was acting as a member of the rich Gulf residents of Ramlet al-Bayda annoyed with debke music wafting in from the sea or as the Saudi representative who's hostile to Gaza because of Iran's sponsorship of Hamas. I can't say for sure, but I have a feeling that it's probably a bit of both.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

A reminder

The conservative blogosphere is full of armchair quarterbacks and Middle East "experts" (see comments) who are fond of telling us about Arab propaganda and accusing the "MSM" of toeing the "terrorist" line. So from time to time, it's a good idea to drop in on the Israeli side of the beat:

Today's memo from the Israel Defense Forces censorship office:

1. Real-time reports on the exact locations of rocket hits are strictly prohibited. Reports, on delayed-time, of exact locations must always be approved by the IDF Censor.

2. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports of rocket hits at IDF bases and/or strategic installations.

3. The IDF Censor will not authorize reporting on rockets that fell into the Mediterranean Sea.

4. The IDF Censor will not authorize photographs of rockets with identifying marks.

5. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports regarding visits by senior Israel Government officials and IDF officer in southern Israel.

6. The IDF Censor will not authorize information on exploded terrorist ordinance or any other malfunctioning ordinance.

7. Panoramic, wide-angle, etc. photographs of rocket hits are strictly prohibited.

Please ensure that all staff members are aware of the foregoing.

The foregoing does not obviate the obligation to submit to the IDF Censor – prior to publication – of any news item regarding rocket hits or any other subject that must be approved by the IDF Censor.

When complaining about a militant guerilla organization's restrictions on reporting, I think it's only fair to recall that the other side actually has a censorship office.

The danger of precedent

I'm sure someone else has noticed it, but I think it's important to note the dangerous precedent set by the Bush doctrine of preventative war and the ensuing "war on terror." American allies in Turkey and Colombia have taken advantage of this precedent to conduct their own cross-border attacks into Iraq and Ecuador, respectively.

One can empathize with the tough situation that Ankara and Bogotá are in with the PKK and FARC without accepting the idea that they can invade neighboring countries. This is a problem that's endemic in Africa, where terrorist and rebel groups are tools of statecraft used by neighboring regimes to weaken their enemies. So in Khartoum, Chadian and Ugandan rebels are supplied. Addis Ababa supports rebels in Darfur, Asmara supports Somali rebellions in Ogaden, and Kampala returns the Sudanese favor by supporting the South and Darfur against the center in Khartoum. And let's not even bring up central Africa.

Let's hope that South America doesn't break into the same dirty pattern. Although Colombian accusations that Chávez has been supporting FARC and his response that he'd invade Colombia if Bogotá tried the same thing on the Venezuelan border as just happened on the Ecuadorian side are bad news for stability in the region:

[Colombian ambassador] Mr. Ospina said that, in addition to the alleged payment by Mr. Chavez, the information found on the laptops that Colombian troops seized indicated that President Rafael Correa’s government had met several times with the FARC and allowed them to set up permanent bases in Ecuadorean territory. He said Colombia would seek charges against President Chávez at the International Criminal Court.

“There is not the least doubt that the governments of Venezuela and Ecuador have been negotiating with terrorists,” Mr. Ospina said. “Allowing terrorist groups to keep camps on their territory border for the planning and execution of terrorist acts is a crime and a clear violation of international treaties.” Television in Venezuela also broadcast images of tank battalions heading to the border, following a threat by Mr. Chávez on Sunday that Colombia would be inviting war if it carried out an incursion in Venezuela similar to the one on Saturday in a remote Amazonian province of Ecuador that killed 21 guerrillas.

Mr. Chávez’s threat, which included a taunt that Venezuela would use its Russian-made Sukhoi fighter jets to attack Colombia, has been interpreted here as a sign that Mr. Chávez stands ready to defend the FARC, a group classified as terrorists in the United States and Europe that is reported to operate without hindrance along Venezuela’s porous 1,300-mile border with Colombia.

Contrasting the FARC’s image in Colombia as a group that finances itself through cocaine trafficking and abductions and still plants land mines in rural areas, documentaries on state television here in Venezuela portray the FARC as an insurgency born out of efforts to combat Colombia’s moneyed elite.

On his Sunday television program, Mr. Chávez went further by calling for a minute of silence to mourn for Mr. Reyes, the fallen guerrilla leader whose real name was Luis Édgar Devia.

If we add to the Colombian and Turkish examples, the Ethiopians in Somalia, a clear pattern of US allies taking advantage of the doctrine of preventative war becomes clear. So while it's important to note that cross border raids are not new by any means, due to the American invasion of Iraq they've probably become more common and more defensible by US allies the world over.

Tuesday, March 04, 2008

I love you when you're not here

CNN International just aired a press conference with Bush and King Abdullah of Jordan. Most of the statements were platitudes and made no new headway, but there's one thing that I did notice that I hadn't remarked before. Both Bush adn the reporters insisted on calling Abu Mazen "President Abbas." Bush also insisted on saying that a Palestinian state couldn't "look like Swiss cheese." This is the second time I've heard this remark from him. If it's not disingenuous, it's an important caveat to the idea of a two-state solution and has a folksy charm that's much more specific than the adjective "viable" that's often used to describe a future Palestinian state.

Otherwise, the American University of Beirut was full of students wearing black and white Palestinian keffiyehs in support of Gaza today. Interestingly enough, none of the Lebanese students I spoke with seemed to think that their support for their neighbors should extend to the Palestinians who were killed (around 50) or displaced (over 30,000) last year in Nahr el-Bared. They told me that the government had the right to go in and destroy the camp in order to root out the terrorists. When I asked them what the difference was between that and when Israelis use almost identical rhetoric, they insisted that the two situations had nothing in common. One student insisted that Palestinians didn't deserve any rights in Lebanon.

As usual, Lebanese solidarity with Palestinians seems to be more about opposing Israel than supporting Palestinians. Ya haram.

Saturday, March 01, 2008

Israel threatens Gazans with a "shoah"

I spend a lot of time getting annoyed when people throw around the word "genocide" or "holocaust" when it's not warranted. This often means rebuking Lebanese and Palestinian friends who want to call the Israeli occupation a genocide. The occupation is a lot of things, none of them savory, but a genocide it is not, and calling it one cheapens the word.

So you can imagine my surprise when I saw last night that Israel's deputy defense minister, Matan Vilnai, had threatened Palestinians in Gaza with a "shoah":

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - A senior Israeli defense official said on Friday that Palestinians firing rockets from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip would bring upon themselves what he termed a "shoah," the Hebrew word for holocaust or disaster.

The word is rarely used in Israel outside discussions of the Nazi Holocaust of Jews. Many Israelis are loath to countenance its use to describe other contemporary events. Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said the Palestinians faced "new Nazis."

Israeli air strikes have killed at least 33 Gazans, including five children, in the past two days. The army, which carried out additional air strikes on Friday, said most of those killed were militants.

I'm no Hebraist, but according to Reuters and common sense, "shoah," like "holocaust" isn't a word that's tossed around lightly in Israel. And whenever there's a comment by someone like Ahmadinejad, quoting Khomeini, saying that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time," we get Israel supporters clamoring for the world to denounce the genocidal intent of the Iranian regime. So will these same people condemn Israel's even more explicit language?

Just the other day on the Olin Institute's Middle Eastern Strategy at Harvard blog, Stephen Peter Rosen was making a fuss about a comment that Ahmadinejad made calling Israel a "black and dirty microbe," informing us that this change in discourse could be "associated with biological attacks or other unconventional mass killings." 

So since Rosen says that he's interested in tracking the discourse between Israel and Iran, I can imagine that the Harvard blog will soon have a post up warning of the impending "shoah" to be visited upon the Gazans. After all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

Of course not. If we look a the comments to Rosen's post, we're given the simple answer by Harvard's specialist on Armenia, James Russell, that "Ahmadinejad and Hezbollah are obviously murderous and crazy." I knew there was a simple answer!

UPDATE: Melanie Phillips at the Spectator is now claiming that "In Hebrew, the word ‘shoah’ is never used to mean ‘holocaust’ or ‘genocide’ because of the acute historical resonance." (Italics hers.) Someone should get Claude Lanzmann on the phone to let him know he's made a terrible mistake.

And for the record, the Israeli daily Ha'aretz has this to say about the remark:

Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai went as far as threatening a "shoah," the Hebrew word for holocaust or disaster. The word is generally used to refer to the Nazi Holocaust, but a spokesman for Vilnai said the deputy defense minister used the word in the sense of "disaster," saying "he did not mean to make any allusion to the genocide."

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

The Ministry of Foresight

When I worked at a certain UN organization, I used to make fun of the fact that one of its sections had been renamed the Division of Foresight. But the more time I spend in Beirut, the more I think that the idea isn't such a bad one. After all, there are always ideas about expanding the number of ministerial portfolios, and I think that what Lebanon really needs is a Minister of Foresight.

One can see the lack of long-term vision on a daily basis. The cab driver would rather insist on a double fare and not pick anyone up than take regular fares and fill his car. The landlord would rather have a building full of high-priced empty apartments than a building full of tenants who pay a fair rent. The shopkeeper would rather overcharge a customer once than have his business over the long term. And this extends to all spheres of Lebanese life, political and social. There seems to be an idea that the only way to get ahead is by fucking someone else over. The Lebanese have yet to learn that while you can shear a sheep many times, you can only skin it once.

My landlord, while trying to get out of paying to repair the hot water heater told me this today: "I am Lebanese. You know what this mean? It mean, I know everything." And in a way he's right, because this country is full of people who think they're smarter than everyone else and who want to prove it by screwing everyone else over. You see it in the driving, in business, in social interactions and in everything else.

And while one might argue that the country's instability is responsible for such short-sighted thinking, I'm not so sure it isn't the other way around.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Seeing Israel in Paris

I'm in Paris this week to surprise my good friend for his birthday and see others whom I've been missing lately,  the city herself my friend's unborn baby girl. I was glad to see that while I was going to be here, I could see Amos Oz and David Grossman at the Centre Pompidou.

It wasn't until I arrived that I realized that the reason Grossman and Oz were in Paris in the first place was the Salon du Livre and the fact that this year, Israel was showcased as the guest of honor. I then found out from some Franco-Algerian friends, who accompanied me to the Pompidou event, that there had been a bomb threat and a boycott. (For a good summary in English of the whole thing, check out Lauren Elkin's account.)

The Oz and Grossman event wasn't at all what I was expecting. I knew that it was ostensibly about their literature but assumed that since both authors are politically active, there would be a fair amount of politics involved also. I was looking forward to this, not least because the only books I've read by either author are political non-fiction. There was a fog of politics that floated above the evening but never settled. Since there was no opportunity for questions, the young swooning moderator, who sounded more like a groupie than a literary critic or writer, and the writers themselves were able to keep to the topic of writing and literature.

One effect of this was that the Holocaust was very much present in the talk, but the Palestinians almost not at all. This was a little disappointing to me, because it's hard for me to imagine Palestinian writing (and this may be the fault of wonderful Mourid Barghouti and Mahmoud Darwish) without a heavy Israeli presence. Also, Oz and Grossman seemed very distant and foreign to me, because of the linguistic barrier. For some reason, I was expecting them to speak in English, but instead they spoke in Hebrew, which was translated into French by one of the best interpreters I've had the pleasure of listening to. His voice was soft and exact, and I felt cradled by his cadence. David Grossman was fairly spontaneous but sometimes a little rambling, whereas Oz spoke like a robot but had more interesting things to say. (It's only fair to mention that a lot of Oz's discourse was canned, as I'd already read close to a third of it in various of his books, interviews and articles.)

It was interesting for me to see Israel in this light: as a state like another. Because in Lebanon, Israel is not only not like other states, it's violent and dangerous. We're waiting for the next war, which will likely be even worse than the last one, so it's difficult to empathize with Israel and its people, even if many of them (like Grossman and Oz) have opinions similar to mine. This reminds me of my trip to the West Bank at the end of the war in 2006. Only rarely did I cross over to Jewish Jerusalem or interact with Israelis. I felt shaken by the bombing of Lebanon and almost afraid to see where those bombs were coming from. I now regret not exploring Tel Aviv or visiting Yad Vashem, which I've wanted to see for a long time. But July 2006 was not the time for that kind of a trip; hopefully I'll have another occasion to go in the not-so-distant future. Or even better, perhaps one day I'll be able to make the short drive to the beach in Tel Aviv from Beirut.

Otherwise, and as per usual, I've taken advantage of Paris to do some book shopping. It seems that Avraham Burg's book, which won't be out in English until October, has been released in French already. I'd like to be able to share it with my Anglophone friends in Beirut, but when I saw it used at Gilbert Joseph, I couldn't pass it up. Otherwise, I also found a used copy of Avi Shlaim's The Iron Wall at my favorite English book store here. Other, non-Israel-related, books include Nerval's Voyage en Orient, Paul Morand's New York (a present from Sebastien) and George Corm's L'Europe et l'Orient. I won't be happy until I find used copies of Samir Kassir's Histoire de Beyrouth and Jean Hatzfeld's Stratégie des Antilopes.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

The world in maps

The Middle East Strategy at Harvard blog sometimes publishes some really ridiculous stuff that ought not be taken seriously by anyone. But every once in a while, the administrators of the blog (whose identities remain unknown, to me at least) put something up that's really helpful. This time, it's two maps of the West Bank. To my mind, this one is particularly helpful in understanding why the two-state solution is probably no longer viable (click on image to get larger pdf version):

We often hear about how impossible a one-state solution would be, but maps like this show how close Palestine and Israel already are to being a single state. In any case, what's left of Palestine and is on offer as a Palestinian state isn't much and could never function as an independent state. The quicker we realize this and start working towards peace accordingly, the quicker the violence will end and the quicker we (Jews and Arabs alike) can get to making the Middle East a good place to live again.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Retired US General speaks out against "Israel's crimes"

Via Weiss, the conservative Washington Times surprisingly prints a letter by a retired Army general in Georgia on why the US should stop funding Israel:

At least 20 Palestinians, including four children playing soccer, were killed by the Israeli military in a one-day missile barrage ("Israeli air strikes kill 20," World, Feb. 29). These deaths resulted when Israel retaliated for the death of one Israeli college student from Palestinian rocket fire outside Sderot, Israel, the day before — after Israeli missiles had killed 12 Palestinians on the previous day.

It seems that this seesaw retaliation will never end, not as long as Israel continues its brutal and illegal occupation.

The Senate and House Appropriations subcommittees on state, foreign operations and related programs are preparing to vote on President Bush's $30 billion increase in military aid to Israel, which currently receives approximately $3.3 billion in annual federal aid.

Mr. Bush promised in his State of the Union address that he will end the spending of taxpayer money on "wasteful or bloated" programs. Not only is this additional foreign aid to Israel a "wasteful and bloated" program, but it also is illegal and immoral. It's illegal because Israel uses this military aid in violation of the Arms Export Control Act and Foreign Assistance Act to violate the human rights of Palestinians through its brutal military occupation and siege of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip. It's immoral because the Israeli siege and occupation of Palestinians — and the humanitarian crises they are causing — are enforced with U.S. weapons, making every U.S. taxpayer an accessory to Israel's crimes.

We don't have the money to fix falling bridges in America, but it seems we always have enough money when it comes to Israel.

BRIG. GEN. JAMES J. DAVID

Army (retired)

Monday, March 10, 2008

Paris breaks political impasse in Lebanon

I'd like to offer a solution to the political impasse as presented by a friend of mine in Paris. I've translated it into English for the Anglophone audience, but the original can be found in the comments of the previous post:


The example of Lebanon inspires new political choices for me which consist of fighting to eliminate the presidential office. The revolution did not finish the job; it was necessary to cut off the head of the state; the only president of this country will remain a cheese.



I also think that since Lebanon can't find itself a capable man to rally all the parties behind him, it's making a recruiting error, for because this man doesn't exist, it's necessary to widen the recruitment to other species: animals, vegetables or maybe an object, a machine, something that symbolizes Lebanon, a new totem.

The list is long. What do you think about an octopus, a cedar, a Mercedes, a 4x4, a fork, a chick pea or a lubbia?

I know that N has a preference for donkeys, and maybe that isn't such a bad idea. It's a hardy animal that can carry heavy loads upon its shoulders without ever complaining.

I think you guys need a donkey. It's a noble animal that we must reclaim. Furthermore, that would allow the beginning of a new collection of stickers for parties and colors. I'll trade you my Hezbollah donkey for your Lebanese Forces carrot.

I don't know if my modest contribution will allow the country to get out of this crisis, but if you think it's useful, spread the word, because we never know, the world's going crazy, so let's take it at its word and enjoy it.

Saturday, March 08, 2008

Classy Saudis

Thursday night there was a peaceful protest in solidarity with Gazans on the beach in West Beirut. The events included poetry reading, live music (traditional and hib hob), a painting, candle lighting and finally a traditional Palestinian debke dance performance. The crowd wasn't enormous, but it was a good gathering nonetheless.

Now, I've never known the Lebanese government to be punctual about anything, and especially not about electing a president. But the protest's permit was for until 8 pm, and when the second hand hit 12, the army came down like clockwork to tell the protesters that they had to leave. It seems that the Saudi ambassador, whose apartment is among those lining the overpriced and unlit towers that line the sea, was responsible for such punctuality. I was wondering if he was acting as a member of the rich Gulf residents of Ramlet al-Bayda annoyed with debke music wafting in from the sea or as the Saudi representative who's hostile to Gaza because of Iran's sponsorship of Hamas. I can't say for sure, but I have a feeling that it's probably a bit of both.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

A reminder

The conservative blogosphere is full of armchair quarterbacks and Middle East "experts" (see comments) who are fond of telling us about Arab propaganda and accusing the "MSM" of toeing the "terrorist" line. So from time to time, it's a good idea to drop in on the Israeli side of the beat:

Today's memo from the Israel Defense Forces censorship office:

1. Real-time reports on the exact locations of rocket hits are strictly prohibited. Reports, on delayed-time, of exact locations must always be approved by the IDF Censor.

2. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports of rocket hits at IDF bases and/or strategic installations.

3. The IDF Censor will not authorize reporting on rockets that fell into the Mediterranean Sea.

4. The IDF Censor will not authorize photographs of rockets with identifying marks.

5. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports regarding visits by senior Israel Government officials and IDF officer in southern Israel.

6. The IDF Censor will not authorize information on exploded terrorist ordinance or any other malfunctioning ordinance.

7. Panoramic, wide-angle, etc. photographs of rocket hits are strictly prohibited.

Please ensure that all staff members are aware of the foregoing.

The foregoing does not obviate the obligation to submit to the IDF Censor – prior to publication – of any news item regarding rocket hits or any other subject that must be approved by the IDF Censor.

When complaining about a militant guerilla organization's restrictions on reporting, I think it's only fair to recall that the other side actually has a censorship office.

The danger of precedent

I'm sure someone else has noticed it, but I think it's important to note the dangerous precedent set by the Bush doctrine of preventative war and the ensuing "war on terror." American allies in Turkey and Colombia have taken advantage of this precedent to conduct their own cross-border attacks into Iraq and Ecuador, respectively.

One can empathize with the tough situation that Ankara and Bogotá are in with the PKK and FARC without accepting the idea that they can invade neighboring countries. This is a problem that's endemic in Africa, where terrorist and rebel groups are tools of statecraft used by neighboring regimes to weaken their enemies. So in Khartoum, Chadian and Ugandan rebels are supplied. Addis Ababa supports rebels in Darfur, Asmara supports Somali rebellions in Ogaden, and Kampala returns the Sudanese favor by supporting the South and Darfur against the center in Khartoum. And let's not even bring up central Africa.

Let's hope that South America doesn't break into the same dirty pattern. Although Colombian accusations that Chávez has been supporting FARC and his response that he'd invade Colombia if Bogotá tried the same thing on the Venezuelan border as just happened on the Ecuadorian side are bad news for stability in the region:

[Colombian ambassador] Mr. Ospina said that, in addition to the alleged payment by Mr. Chavez, the information found on the laptops that Colombian troops seized indicated that President Rafael Correa’s government had met several times with the FARC and allowed them to set up permanent bases in Ecuadorean territory. He said Colombia would seek charges against President Chávez at the International Criminal Court.

“There is not the least doubt that the governments of Venezuela and Ecuador have been negotiating with terrorists,” Mr. Ospina said. “Allowing terrorist groups to keep camps on their territory border for the planning and execution of terrorist acts is a crime and a clear violation of international treaties.” Television in Venezuela also broadcast images of tank battalions heading to the border, following a threat by Mr. Chávez on Sunday that Colombia would be inviting war if it carried out an incursion in Venezuela similar to the one on Saturday in a remote Amazonian province of Ecuador that killed 21 guerrillas.

Mr. Chávez’s threat, which included a taunt that Venezuela would use its Russian-made Sukhoi fighter jets to attack Colombia, has been interpreted here as a sign that Mr. Chávez stands ready to defend the FARC, a group classified as terrorists in the United States and Europe that is reported to operate without hindrance along Venezuela’s porous 1,300-mile border with Colombia.

Contrasting the FARC’s image in Colombia as a group that finances itself through cocaine trafficking and abductions and still plants land mines in rural areas, documentaries on state television here in Venezuela portray the FARC as an insurgency born out of efforts to combat Colombia’s moneyed elite.

On his Sunday television program, Mr. Chávez went further by calling for a minute of silence to mourn for Mr. Reyes, the fallen guerrilla leader whose real name was Luis Édgar Devia.

If we add to the Colombian and Turkish examples, the Ethiopians in Somalia, a clear pattern of US allies taking advantage of the doctrine of preventative war becomes clear. So while it's important to note that cross border raids are not new by any means, due to the American invasion of Iraq they've probably become more common and more defensible by US allies the world over.

Tuesday, March 04, 2008

I love you when you're not here

CNN International just aired a press conference with Bush and King Abdullah of Jordan. Most of the statements were platitudes and made no new headway, but there's one thing that I did notice that I hadn't remarked before. Both Bush adn the reporters insisted on calling Abu Mazen "President Abbas." Bush also insisted on saying that a Palestinian state couldn't "look like Swiss cheese." This is the second time I've heard this remark from him. If it's not disingenuous, it's an important caveat to the idea of a two-state solution and has a folksy charm that's much more specific than the adjective "viable" that's often used to describe a future Palestinian state.

Otherwise, the American University of Beirut was full of students wearing black and white Palestinian keffiyehs in support of Gaza today. Interestingly enough, none of the Lebanese students I spoke with seemed to think that their support for their neighbors should extend to the Palestinians who were killed (around 50) or displaced (over 30,000) last year in Nahr el-Bared. They told me that the government had the right to go in and destroy the camp in order to root out the terrorists. When I asked them what the difference was between that and when Israelis use almost identical rhetoric, they insisted that the two situations had nothing in common. One student insisted that Palestinians didn't deserve any rights in Lebanon.

As usual, Lebanese solidarity with Palestinians seems to be more about opposing Israel than supporting Palestinians. Ya haram.

Saturday, March 01, 2008

Israel threatens Gazans with a "shoah"

I spend a lot of time getting annoyed when people throw around the word "genocide" or "holocaust" when it's not warranted. This often means rebuking Lebanese and Palestinian friends who want to call the Israeli occupation a genocide. The occupation is a lot of things, none of them savory, but a genocide it is not, and calling it one cheapens the word.

So you can imagine my surprise when I saw last night that Israel's deputy defense minister, Matan Vilnai, had threatened Palestinians in Gaza with a "shoah":

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - A senior Israeli defense official said on Friday that Palestinians firing rockets from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip would bring upon themselves what he termed a "shoah," the Hebrew word for holocaust or disaster.

The word is rarely used in Israel outside discussions of the Nazi Holocaust of Jews. Many Israelis are loath to countenance its use to describe other contemporary events. Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said the Palestinians faced "new Nazis."

Israeli air strikes have killed at least 33 Gazans, including five children, in the past two days. The army, which carried out additional air strikes on Friday, said most of those killed were militants.

I'm no Hebraist, but according to Reuters and common sense, "shoah," like "holocaust" isn't a word that's tossed around lightly in Israel. And whenever there's a comment by someone like Ahmadinejad, quoting Khomeini, saying that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time," we get Israel supporters clamoring for the world to denounce the genocidal intent of the Iranian regime. So will these same people condemn Israel's even more explicit language?

Just the other day on the Olin Institute's Middle Eastern Strategy at Harvard blog, Stephen Peter Rosen was making a fuss about a comment that Ahmadinejad made calling Israel a "black and dirty microbe," informing us that this change in discourse could be "associated with biological attacks or other unconventional mass killings." 

So since Rosen says that he's interested in tracking the discourse between Israel and Iran, I can imagine that the Harvard blog will soon have a post up warning of the impending "shoah" to be visited upon the Gazans. After all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

Of course not. If we look a the comments to Rosen's post, we're given the simple answer by Harvard's specialist on Armenia, James Russell, that "Ahmadinejad and Hezbollah are obviously murderous and crazy." I knew there was a simple answer!

UPDATE: Melanie Phillips at the Spectator is now claiming that "In Hebrew, the word ‘shoah’ is never used to mean ‘holocaust’ or ‘genocide’ because of the acute historical resonance." (Italics hers.) Someone should get Claude Lanzmann on the phone to let him know he's made a terrible mistake.

And for the record, the Israeli daily Ha'aretz has this to say about the remark:

Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai went as far as threatening a "shoah," the Hebrew word for holocaust or disaster. The word is generally used to refer to the Nazi Holocaust, but a spokesman for Vilnai said the deputy defense minister used the word in the sense of "disaster," saying "he did not mean to make any allusion to the genocide."

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

The Ministry of Foresight

When I worked at a certain UN organization, I used to make fun of the fact that one of its sections had been renamed the Division of Foresight. But the more time I spend in Beirut, the more I think that the idea isn't such a bad one. After all, there are always ideas about expanding the number of ministerial portfolios, and I think that what Lebanon really needs is a Minister of Foresight.

One can see the lack of long-term vision on a daily basis. The cab driver would rather insist on a double fare and not pick anyone up than take regular fares and fill his car. The landlord would rather have a building full of high-priced empty apartments than a building full of tenants who pay a fair rent. The shopkeeper would rather overcharge a customer once than have his business over the long term. And this extends to all spheres of Lebanese life, political and social. There seems to be an idea that the only way to get ahead is by fucking someone else over. The Lebanese have yet to learn that while you can shear a sheep many times, you can only skin it once.

My landlord, while trying to get out of paying to repair the hot water heater told me this today: "I am Lebanese. You know what this mean? It mean, I know everything." And in a way he's right, because this country is full of people who think they're smarter than everyone else and who want to prove it by screwing everyone else over. You see it in the driving, in business, in social interactions and in everything else.

And while one might argue that the country's instability is responsible for such short-sighted thinking, I'm not so sure it isn't the other way around.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Seeing Israel in Paris

I'm in Paris this week to surprise my good friend for his birthday and see others whom I've been missing lately,  the city herself my friend's unborn baby girl. I was glad to see that while I was going to be here, I could see Amos Oz and David Grossman at the Centre Pompidou.

It wasn't until I arrived that I realized that the reason Grossman and Oz were in Paris in the first place was the Salon du Livre and the fact that this year, Israel was showcased as the guest of honor. I then found out from some Franco-Algerian friends, who accompanied me to the Pompidou event, that there had been a bomb threat and a boycott. (For a good summary in English of the whole thing, check out Lauren Elkin's account.)

The Oz and Grossman event wasn't at all what I was expecting. I knew that it was ostensibly about their literature but assumed that since both authors are politically active, there would be a fair amount of politics involved also. I was looking forward to this, not least because the only books I've read by either author are political non-fiction. There was a fog of politics that floated above the evening but never settled. Since there was no opportunity for questions, the young swooning moderator, who sounded more like a groupie than a literary critic or writer, and the writers themselves were able to keep to the topic of writing and literature.

One effect of this was that the Holocaust was very much present in the talk, but the Palestinians almost not at all. This was a little disappointing to me, because it's hard for me to imagine Palestinian writing (and this may be the fault of wonderful Mourid Barghouti and Mahmoud Darwish) without a heavy Israeli presence. Also, Oz and Grossman seemed very distant and foreign to me, because of the linguistic barrier. For some reason, I was expecting them to speak in English, but instead they spoke in Hebrew, which was translated into French by one of the best interpreters I've had the pleasure of listening to. His voice was soft and exact, and I felt cradled by his cadence. David Grossman was fairly spontaneous but sometimes a little rambling, whereas Oz spoke like a robot but had more interesting things to say. (It's only fair to mention that a lot of Oz's discourse was canned, as I'd already read close to a third of it in various of his books, interviews and articles.)

It was interesting for me to see Israel in this light: as a state like another. Because in Lebanon, Israel is not only not like other states, it's violent and dangerous. We're waiting for the next war, which will likely be even worse than the last one, so it's difficult to empathize with Israel and its people, even if many of them (like Grossman and Oz) have opinions similar to mine. This reminds me of my trip to the West Bank at the end of the war in 2006. Only rarely did I cross over to Jewish Jerusalem or interact with Israelis. I felt shaken by the bombing of Lebanon and almost afraid to see where those bombs were coming from. I now regret not exploring Tel Aviv or visiting Yad Vashem, which I've wanted to see for a long time. But July 2006 was not the time for that kind of a trip; hopefully I'll have another occasion to go in the not-so-distant future. Or even better, perhaps one day I'll be able to make the short drive to the beach in Tel Aviv from Beirut.

Otherwise, and as per usual, I've taken advantage of Paris to do some book shopping. It seems that Avraham Burg's book, which won't be out in English until October, has been released in French already. I'd like to be able to share it with my Anglophone friends in Beirut, but when I saw it used at Gilbert Joseph, I couldn't pass it up. Otherwise, I also found a used copy of Avi Shlaim's The Iron Wall at my favorite English book store here. Other, non-Israel-related, books include Nerval's Voyage en Orient, Paul Morand's New York (a present from Sebastien) and George Corm's L'Europe et l'Orient. I won't be happy until I find used copies of Samir Kassir's Histoire de Beyrouth and Jean Hatzfeld's Stratégie des Antilopes.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

The world in maps

The Middle East Strategy at Harvard blog sometimes publishes some really ridiculous stuff that ought not be taken seriously by anyone. But every once in a while, the administrators of the blog (whose identities remain unknown, to me at least) put something up that's really helpful. This time, it's two maps of the West Bank. To my mind, this one is particularly helpful in understanding why the two-state solution is probably no longer viable (click on image to get larger pdf version):

We often hear about how impossible a one-state solution would be, but maps like this show how close Palestine and Israel already are to being a single state. In any case, what's left of Palestine and is on offer as a Palestinian state isn't much and could never function as an independent state. The quicker we realize this and start working towards peace accordingly, the quicker the violence will end and the quicker we (Jews and Arabs alike) can get to making the Middle East a good place to live again.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Retired US General speaks out against "Israel's crimes"

Via Weiss, the conservative Washington Times surprisingly prints a letter by a retired Army general in Georgia on why the US should stop funding Israel:

At least 20 Palestinians, including four children playing soccer, were killed by the Israeli military in a one-day missile barrage ("Israeli air strikes kill 20," World, Feb. 29). These deaths resulted when Israel retaliated for the death of one Israeli college student from Palestinian rocket fire outside Sderot, Israel, the day before — after Israeli missiles had killed 12 Palestinians on the previous day.

It seems that this seesaw retaliation will never end, not as long as Israel continues its brutal and illegal occupation.

The Senate and House Appropriations subcommittees on state, foreign operations and related programs are preparing to vote on President Bush's $30 billion increase in military aid to Israel, which currently receives approximately $3.3 billion in annual federal aid.

Mr. Bush promised in his State of the Union address that he will end the spending of taxpayer money on "wasteful or bloated" programs. Not only is this additional foreign aid to Israel a "wasteful and bloated" program, but it also is illegal and immoral. It's illegal because Israel uses this military aid in violation of the Arms Export Control Act and Foreign Assistance Act to violate the human rights of Palestinians through its brutal military occupation and siege of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip. It's immoral because the Israeli siege and occupation of Palestinians — and the humanitarian crises they are causing — are enforced with U.S. weapons, making every U.S. taxpayer an accessory to Israel's crimes.

We don't have the money to fix falling bridges in America, but it seems we always have enough money when it comes to Israel.

BRIG. GEN. JAMES J. DAVID

Army (retired)

Monday, March 10, 2008

Paris breaks political impasse in Lebanon

I'd like to offer a solution to the political impasse as presented by a friend of mine in Paris. I've translated it into English for the Anglophone audience, but the original can be found in the comments of the previous post:


The example of Lebanon inspires new political choices for me which consist of fighting to eliminate the presidential office. The revolution did not finish the job; it was necessary to cut off the head of the state; the only president of this country will remain a cheese.



I also think that since Lebanon can't find itself a capable man to rally all the parties behind him, it's making a recruiting error, for because this man doesn't exist, it's necessary to widen the recruitment to other species: animals, vegetables or maybe an object, a machine, something that symbolizes Lebanon, a new totem.

The list is long. What do you think about an octopus, a cedar, a Mercedes, a 4x4, a fork, a chick pea or a lubbia?

I know that N has a preference for donkeys, and maybe that isn't such a bad idea. It's a hardy animal that can carry heavy loads upon its shoulders without ever complaining.

I think you guys need a donkey. It's a noble animal that we must reclaim. Furthermore, that would allow the beginning of a new collection of stickers for parties and colors. I'll trade you my Hezbollah donkey for your Lebanese Forces carrot.

I don't know if my modest contribution will allow the country to get out of this crisis, but if you think it's useful, spread the word, because we never know, the world's going crazy, so let's take it at its word and enjoy it.

Saturday, March 08, 2008

Classy Saudis

Thursday night there was a peaceful protest in solidarity with Gazans on the beach in West Beirut. The events included poetry reading, live music (traditional and hib hob), a painting, candle lighting and finally a traditional Palestinian debke dance performance. The crowd wasn't enormous, but it was a good gathering nonetheless.

Now, I've never known the Lebanese government to be punctual about anything, and especially not about electing a president. But the protest's permit was for until 8 pm, and when the second hand hit 12, the army came down like clockwork to tell the protesters that they had to leave. It seems that the Saudi ambassador, whose apartment is among those lining the overpriced and unlit towers that line the sea, was responsible for such punctuality. I was wondering if he was acting as a member of the rich Gulf residents of Ramlet al-Bayda annoyed with debke music wafting in from the sea or as the Saudi representative who's hostile to Gaza because of Iran's sponsorship of Hamas. I can't say for sure, but I have a feeling that it's probably a bit of both.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

A reminder

The conservative blogosphere is full of armchair quarterbacks and Middle East "experts" (see comments) who are fond of telling us about Arab propaganda and accusing the "MSM" of toeing the "terrorist" line. So from time to time, it's a good idea to drop in on the Israeli side of the beat:

Today's memo from the Israel Defense Forces censorship office:

1. Real-time reports on the exact locations of rocket hits are strictly prohibited. Reports, on delayed-time, of exact locations must always be approved by the IDF Censor.

2. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports of rocket hits at IDF bases and/or strategic installations.

3. The IDF Censor will not authorize reporting on rockets that fell into the Mediterranean Sea.

4. The IDF Censor will not authorize photographs of rockets with identifying marks.

5. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports regarding visits by senior Israel Government officials and IDF officer in southern Israel.

6. The IDF Censor will not authorize information on exploded terrorist ordinance or any other malfunctioning ordinance.

7. Panoramic, wide-angle, etc. photographs of rocket hits are strictly prohibited.

Please ensure that all staff members are aware of the foregoing.

The foregoing does not obviate the obligation to submit to the IDF Censor – prior to publication – of any news item regarding rocket hits or any other subject that must be approved by the IDF Censor.

When complaining about a militant guerilla organization's restrictions on reporting, I think it's only fair to recall that the other side actually has a censorship office.

The danger of precedent

I'm sure someone else has noticed it, but I think it's important to note the dangerous precedent set by the Bush doctrine of preventative war and the ensuing "war on terror." American allies in Turkey and Colombia have taken advantage of this precedent to conduct their own cross-border attacks into Iraq and Ecuador, respectively.

One can empathize with the tough situation that Ankara and Bogotá are in with the PKK and FARC without accepting the idea that they can invade neighboring countries. This is a problem that's endemic in Africa, where terrorist and rebel groups are tools of statecraft used by neighboring regimes to weaken their enemies. So in Khartoum, Chadian and Ugandan rebels are supplied. Addis Ababa supports rebels in Darfur, Asmara supports Somali rebellions in Ogaden, and Kampala returns the Sudanese favor by supporting the South and Darfur against the center in Khartoum. And let's not even bring up central Africa.

Let's hope that South America doesn't break into the same dirty pattern. Although Colombian accusations that Chávez has been supporting FARC and his response that he'd invade Colombia if Bogotá tried the same thing on the Venezuelan border as just happened on the Ecuadorian side are bad news for stability in the region:

[Colombian ambassador] Mr. Ospina said that, in addition to the alleged payment by Mr. Chavez, the information found on the laptops that Colombian troops seized indicated that President Rafael Correa’s government had met several times with the FARC and allowed them to set up permanent bases in Ecuadorean territory. He said Colombia would seek charges against President Chávez at the International Criminal Court.

“There is not the least doubt that the governments of Venezuela and Ecuador have been negotiating with terrorists,” Mr. Ospina said. “Allowing terrorist groups to keep camps on their territory border for the planning and execution of terrorist acts is a crime and a clear violation of international treaties.” Television in Venezuela also broadcast images of tank battalions heading to the border, following a threat by Mr. Chávez on Sunday that Colombia would be inviting war if it carried out an incursion in Venezuela similar to the one on Saturday in a remote Amazonian province of Ecuador that killed 21 guerrillas.

Mr. Chávez’s threat, which included a taunt that Venezuela would use its Russian-made Sukhoi fighter jets to attack Colombia, has been interpreted here as a sign that Mr. Chávez stands ready to defend the FARC, a group classified as terrorists in the United States and Europe that is reported to operate without hindrance along Venezuela’s porous 1,300-mile border with Colombia.

Contrasting the FARC’s image in Colombia as a group that finances itself through cocaine trafficking and abductions and still plants land mines in rural areas, documentaries on state television here in Venezuela portray the FARC as an insurgency born out of efforts to combat Colombia’s moneyed elite.

On his Sunday television program, Mr. Chávez went further by calling for a minute of silence to mourn for Mr. Reyes, the fallen guerrilla leader whose real name was Luis Édgar Devia.

If we add to the Colombian and Turkish examples, the Ethiopians in Somalia, a clear pattern of US allies taking advantage of the doctrine of preventative war becomes clear. So while it's important to note that cross border raids are not new by any means, due to the American invasion of Iraq they've probably become more common and more defensible by US allies the world over.

Tuesday, March 04, 2008

I love you when you're not here

CNN International just aired a press conference with Bush and King Abdullah of Jordan. Most of the statements were platitudes and made no new headway, but there's one thing that I did notice that I hadn't remarked before. Both Bush adn the reporters insisted on calling Abu Mazen "President Abbas." Bush also insisted on saying that a Palestinian state couldn't "look like Swiss cheese." This is the second time I've heard this remark from him. If it's not disingenuous, it's an important caveat to the idea of a two-state solution and has a folksy charm that's much more specific than the adjective "viable" that's often used to describe a future Palestinian state.

Otherwise, the American University of Beirut was full of students wearing black and white Palestinian keffiyehs in support of Gaza today. Interestingly enough, none of the Lebanese students I spoke with seemed to think that their support for their neighbors should extend to the Palestinians who were killed (around 50) or displaced (over 30,000) last year in Nahr el-Bared. They told me that the government had the right to go in and destroy the camp in order to root out the terrorists. When I asked them what the difference was between that and when Israelis use almost identical rhetoric, they insisted that the two situations had nothing in common. One student insisted that Palestinians didn't deserve any rights in Lebanon.

As usual, Lebanese solidarity with Palestinians seems to be more about opposing Israel than supporting Palestinians. Ya haram.

Saturday, March 01, 2008

Israel threatens Gazans with a "shoah"

I spend a lot of time getting annoyed when people throw around the word "genocide" or "holocaust" when it's not warranted. This often means rebuking Lebanese and Palestinian friends who want to call the Israeli occupation a genocide. The occupation is a lot of things, none of them savory, but a genocide it is not, and calling it one cheapens the word.

So you can imagine my surprise when I saw last night that Israel's deputy defense minister, Matan Vilnai, had threatened Palestinians in Gaza with a "shoah":

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - A senior Israeli defense official said on Friday that Palestinians firing rockets from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip would bring upon themselves what he termed a "shoah," the Hebrew word for holocaust or disaster.

The word is rarely used in Israel outside discussions of the Nazi Holocaust of Jews. Many Israelis are loath to countenance its use to describe other contemporary events. Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said the Palestinians faced "new Nazis."

Israeli air strikes have killed at least 33 Gazans, including five children, in the past two days. The army, which carried out additional air strikes on Friday, said most of those killed were militants.

I'm no Hebraist, but according to Reuters and common sense, "shoah," like "holocaust" isn't a word that's tossed around lightly in Israel. And whenever there's a comment by someone like Ahmadinejad, quoting Khomeini, saying that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time," we get Israel supporters clamoring for the world to denounce the genocidal intent of the Iranian regime. So will these same people condemn Israel's even more explicit language?

Just the other day on the Olin Institute's Middle Eastern Strategy at Harvard blog, Stephen Peter Rosen was making a fuss about a comment that Ahmadinejad made calling Israel a "black and dirty microbe," informing us that this change in discourse could be "associated with biological attacks or other unconventional mass killings." 

So since Rosen says that he's interested in tracking the discourse between Israel and Iran, I can imagine that the Harvard blog will soon have a post up warning of the impending "shoah" to be visited upon the Gazans. After all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

Of course not. If we look a the comments to Rosen's post, we're given the simple answer by Harvard's specialist on Armenia, James Russell, that "Ahmadinejad and Hezbollah are obviously murderous and crazy." I knew there was a simple answer!

UPDATE: Melanie Phillips at the Spectator is now claiming that "In Hebrew, the word ‘shoah’ is never used to mean ‘holocaust’ or ‘genocide’ because of the acute historical resonance." (Italics hers.) Someone should get Claude Lanzmann on the phone to let him know he's made a terrible mistake.

And for the record, the Israeli daily Ha'aretz has this to say about the remark:

Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai went as far as threatening a "shoah," the Hebrew word for holocaust or disaster. The word is generally used to refer to the Nazi Holocaust, but a spokesman for Vilnai said the deputy defense minister used the word in the sense of "disaster," saying "he did not mean to make any allusion to the genocide."

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

The Ministry of Foresight

When I worked at a certain UN organization, I used to make fun of the fact that one of its sections had been renamed the Division of Foresight. But the more time I spend in Beirut, the more I think that the idea isn't such a bad one. After all, there are always ideas about expanding the number of ministerial portfolios, and I think that what Lebanon really needs is a Minister of Foresight.

One can see the lack of long-term vision on a daily basis. The cab driver would rather insist on a double fare and not pick anyone up than take regular fares and fill his car. The landlord would rather have a building full of high-priced empty apartments than a building full of tenants who pay a fair rent. The shopkeeper would rather overcharge a customer once than have his business over the long term. And this extends to all spheres of Lebanese life, political and social. There seems to be an idea that the only way to get ahead is by fucking someone else over. The Lebanese have yet to learn that while you can shear a sheep many times, you can only skin it once.

My landlord, while trying to get out of paying to repair the hot water heater told me this today: "I am Lebanese. You know what this mean? It mean, I know everything." And in a way he's right, because this country is full of people who think they're smarter than everyone else and who want to prove it by screwing everyone else over. You see it in the driving, in business, in social interactions and in everything else.

And while one might argue that the country's instability is responsible for such short-sighted thinking, I'm not so sure it isn't the other way around.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Seeing Israel in Paris

I'm in Paris this week to surprise my good friend for his birthday and see others whom I've been missing lately,  the city herself my friend's unborn baby girl. I was glad to see that while I was going to be here, I could see Amos Oz and David Grossman at the Centre Pompidou.

It wasn't until I arrived that I realized that the reason Grossman and Oz were in Paris in the first place was the Salon du Livre and the fact that this year, Israel was showcased as the guest of honor. I then found out from some Franco-Algerian friends, who accompanied me to the Pompidou event, that there had been a bomb threat and a boycott. (For a good summary in English of the whole thing, check out Lauren Elkin's account.)

The Oz and Grossman event wasn't at all what I was expecting. I knew that it was ostensibly about their literature but assumed that since both authors are politically active, there would be a fair amount of politics involved also. I was looking forward to this, not least because the only books I've read by either author are political non-fiction. There was a fog of politics that floated above the evening but never settled. Since there was no opportunity for questions, the young swooning moderator, who sounded more like a groupie than a literary critic or writer, and the writers themselves were able to keep to the topic of writing and literature.

One effect of this was that the Holocaust was very much present in the talk, but the Palestinians almost not at all. This was a little disappointing to me, because it's hard for me to imagine Palestinian writing (and this may be the fault of wonderful Mourid Barghouti and Mahmoud Darwish) without a heavy Israeli presence. Also, Oz and Grossman seemed very distant and foreign to me, because of the linguistic barrier. For some reason, I was expecting them to speak in English, but instead they spoke in Hebrew, which was translated into French by one of the best interpreters I've had the pleasure of listening to. His voice was soft and exact, and I felt cradled by his cadence. David Grossman was fairly spontaneous but sometimes a little rambling, whereas Oz spoke like a robot but had more interesting things to say. (It's only fair to mention that a lot of Oz's discourse was canned, as I'd already read close to a third of it in various of his books, interviews and articles.)

It was interesting for me to see Israel in this light: as a state like another. Because in Lebanon, Israel is not only not like other states, it's violent and dangerous. We're waiting for the next war, which will likely be even worse than the last one, so it's difficult to empathize with Israel and its people, even if many of them (like Grossman and Oz) have opinions similar to mine. This reminds me of my trip to the West Bank at the end of the war in 2006. Only rarely did I cross over to Jewish Jerusalem or interact with Israelis. I felt shaken by the bombing of Lebanon and almost afraid to see where those bombs were coming from. I now regret not exploring Tel Aviv or visiting Yad Vashem, which I've wanted to see for a long time. But July 2006 was not the time for that kind of a trip; hopefully I'll have another occasion to go in the not-so-distant future. Or even better, perhaps one day I'll be able to make the short drive to the beach in Tel Aviv from Beirut.

Otherwise, and as per usual, I've taken advantage of Paris to do some book shopping. It seems that Avraham Burg's book, which won't be out in English until October, has been released in French already. I'd like to be able to share it with my Anglophone friends in Beirut, but when I saw it used at Gilbert Joseph, I couldn't pass it up. Otherwise, I also found a used copy of Avi Shlaim's The Iron Wall at my favorite English book store here. Other, non-Israel-related, books include Nerval's Voyage en Orient, Paul Morand's New York (a present from Sebastien) and George Corm's L'Europe et l'Orient. I won't be happy until I find used copies of Samir Kassir's Histoire de Beyrouth and Jean Hatzfeld's Stratégie des Antilopes.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

The world in maps

The Middle East Strategy at Harvard blog sometimes publishes some really ridiculous stuff that ought not be taken seriously by anyone. But every once in a while, the administrators of the blog (whose identities remain unknown, to me at least) put something up that's really helpful. This time, it's two maps of the West Bank. To my mind, this one is particularly helpful in understanding why the two-state solution is probably no longer viable (click on image to get larger pdf version):

We often hear about how impossible a one-state solution would be, but maps like this show how close Palestine and Israel already are to being a single state. In any case, what's left of Palestine and is on offer as a Palestinian state isn't much and could never function as an independent state. The quicker we realize this and start working towards peace accordingly, the quicker the violence will end and the quicker we (Jews and Arabs alike) can get to making the Middle East a good place to live again.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Retired US General speaks out against "Israel's crimes"

Via Weiss, the conservative Washington Times surprisingly prints a letter by a retired Army general in Georgia on why the US should stop funding Israel:

At least 20 Palestinians, including four children playing soccer, were killed by the Israeli military in a one-day missile barrage ("Israeli air strikes kill 20," World, Feb. 29). These deaths resulted when Israel retaliated for the death of one Israeli college student from Palestinian rocket fire outside Sderot, Israel, the day before — after Israeli missiles had killed 12 Palestinians on the previous day.

It seems that this seesaw retaliation will never end, not as long as Israel continues its brutal and illegal occupation.

The Senate and House Appropriations subcommittees on state, foreign operations and related programs are preparing to vote on President Bush's $30 billion increase in military aid to Israel, which currently receives approximately $3.3 billion in annual federal aid.

Mr. Bush promised in his State of the Union address that he will end the spending of taxpayer money on "wasteful or bloated" programs. Not only is this additional foreign aid to Israel a "wasteful and bloated" program, but it also is illegal and immoral. It's illegal because Israel uses this military aid in violation of the Arms Export Control Act and Foreign Assistance Act to violate the human rights of Palestinians through its brutal military occupation and siege of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip. It's immoral because the Israeli siege and occupation of Palestinians — and the humanitarian crises they are causing — are enforced with U.S. weapons, making every U.S. taxpayer an accessory to Israel's crimes.

We don't have the money to fix falling bridges in America, but it seems we always have enough money when it comes to Israel.

BRIG. GEN. JAMES J. DAVID

Army (retired)

Monday, March 10, 2008

Paris breaks political impasse in Lebanon

I'd like to offer a solution to the political impasse as presented by a friend of mine in Paris. I've translated it into English for the Anglophone audience, but the original can be found in the comments of the previous post:


The example of Lebanon inspires new political choices for me which consist of fighting to eliminate the presidential office. The revolution did not finish the job; it was necessary to cut off the head of the state; the only president of this country will remain a cheese.



I also think that since Lebanon can't find itself a capable man to rally all the parties behind him, it's making a recruiting error, for because this man doesn't exist, it's necessary to widen the recruitment to other species: animals, vegetables or maybe an object, a machine, something that symbolizes Lebanon, a new totem.

The list is long. What do you think about an octopus, a cedar, a Mercedes, a 4x4, a fork, a chick pea or a lubbia?

I know that N has a preference for donkeys, and maybe that isn't such a bad idea. It's a hardy animal that can carry heavy loads upon its shoulders without ever complaining.

I think you guys need a donkey. It's a noble animal that we must reclaim. Furthermore, that would allow the beginning of a new collection of stickers for parties and colors. I'll trade you my Hezbollah donkey for your Lebanese Forces carrot.

I don't know if my modest contribution will allow the country to get out of this crisis, but if you think it's useful, spread the word, because we never know, the world's going crazy, so let's take it at its word and enjoy it.

Saturday, March 08, 2008

Classy Saudis

Thursday night there was a peaceful protest in solidarity with Gazans on the beach in West Beirut. The events included poetry reading, live music (traditional and hib hob), a painting, candle lighting and finally a traditional Palestinian debke dance performance. The crowd wasn't enormous, but it was a good gathering nonetheless.

Now, I've never known the Lebanese government to be punctual about anything, and especially not about electing a president. But the protest's permit was for until 8 pm, and when the second hand hit 12, the army came down like clockwork to tell the protesters that they had to leave. It seems that the Saudi ambassador, whose apartment is among those lining the overpriced and unlit towers that line the sea, was responsible for such punctuality. I was wondering if he was acting as a member of the rich Gulf residents of Ramlet al-Bayda annoyed with debke music wafting in from the sea or as the Saudi representative who's hostile to Gaza because of Iran's sponsorship of Hamas. I can't say for sure, but I have a feeling that it's probably a bit of both.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

A reminder

The conservative blogosphere is full of armchair quarterbacks and Middle East "experts" (see comments) who are fond of telling us about Arab propaganda and accusing the "MSM" of toeing the "terrorist" line. So from time to time, it's a good idea to drop in on the Israeli side of the beat:

Today's memo from the Israel Defense Forces censorship office:

1. Real-time reports on the exact locations of rocket hits are strictly prohibited. Reports, on delayed-time, of exact locations must always be approved by the IDF Censor.

2. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports of rocket hits at IDF bases and/or strategic installations.

3. The IDF Censor will not authorize reporting on rockets that fell into the Mediterranean Sea.

4. The IDF Censor will not authorize photographs of rockets with identifying marks.

5. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports regarding visits by senior Israel Government officials and IDF officer in southern Israel.

6. The IDF Censor will not authorize information on exploded terrorist ordinance or any other malfunctioning ordinance.

7. Panoramic, wide-angle, etc. photographs of rocket hits are strictly prohibited.

Please ensure that all staff members are aware of the foregoing.

The foregoing does not obviate the obligation to submit to the IDF Censor – prior to publication – of any news item regarding rocket hits or any other subject that must be approved by the IDF Censor.

When complaining about a militant guerilla organization's restrictions on reporting, I think it's only fair to recall that the other side actually has a censorship office.

The danger of precedent

I'm sure someone else has noticed it, but I think it's important to note the dangerous precedent set by the Bush doctrine of preventative war and the ensuing "war on terror." American allies in Turkey and Colombia have taken advantage of this precedent to conduct their own cross-border attacks into Iraq and Ecuador, respectively.

One can empathize with the tough situation that Ankara and Bogotá are in with the PKK and FARC without accepting the idea that they can invade neighboring countries. This is a problem that's endemic in Africa, where terrorist and rebel groups are tools of statecraft used by neighboring regimes to weaken their enemies. So in Khartoum, Chadian and Ugandan rebels are supplied. Addis Ababa supports rebels in Darfur, Asmara supports Somali rebellions in Ogaden, and Kampala returns the Sudanese favor by supporting the South and Darfur against the center in Khartoum. And let's not even bring up central Africa.

Let's hope that South America doesn't break into the same dirty pattern. Although Colombian accusations that Chávez has been supporting FARC and his response that he'd invade Colombia if Bogotá tried the same thing on the Venezuelan border as just happened on the Ecuadorian side are bad news for stability in the region:

[Colombian ambassador] Mr. Ospina said that, in addition to the alleged payment by Mr. Chavez, the information found on the laptops that Colombian troops seized indicated that President Rafael Correa’s government had met several times with the FARC and allowed them to set up permanent bases in Ecuadorean territory. He said Colombia would seek charges against President Chávez at the International Criminal Court.

“There is not the least doubt that the governments of Venezuela and Ecuador have been negotiating with terrorists,” Mr. Ospina said. “Allowing terrorist groups to keep camps on their territory border for the planning and execution of terrorist acts is a crime and a clear violation of international treaties.” Television in Venezuela also broadcast images of tank battalions heading to the border, following a threat by Mr. Chávez on Sunday that Colombia would be inviting war if it carried out an incursion in Venezuela similar to the one on Saturday in a remote Amazonian province of Ecuador that killed 21 guerrillas.

Mr. Chávez’s threat, which included a taunt that Venezuela would use its Russian-made Sukhoi fighter jets to attack Colombia, has been interpreted here as a sign that Mr. Chávez stands ready to defend the FARC, a group classified as terrorists in the United States and Europe that is reported to operate without hindrance along Venezuela’s porous 1,300-mile border with Colombia.

Contrasting the FARC’s image in Colombia as a group that finances itself through cocaine trafficking and abductions and still plants land mines in rural areas, documentaries on state television here in Venezuela portray the FARC as an insurgency born out of efforts to combat Colombia’s moneyed elite.

On his Sunday television program, Mr. Chávez went further by calling for a minute of silence to mourn for Mr. Reyes, the fallen guerrilla leader whose real name was Luis Édgar Devia.

If we add to the Colombian and Turkish examples, the Ethiopians in Somalia, a clear pattern of US allies taking advantage of the doctrine of preventative war becomes clear. So while it's important to note that cross border raids are not new by any means, due to the American invasion of Iraq they've probably become more common and more defensible by US allies the world over.

Tuesday, March 04, 2008

I love you when you're not here

CNN International just aired a press conference with Bush and King Abdullah of Jordan. Most of the statements were platitudes and made no new headway, but there's one thing that I did notice that I hadn't remarked before. Both Bush adn the reporters insisted on calling Abu Mazen "President Abbas." Bush also insisted on saying that a Palestinian state couldn't "look like Swiss cheese." This is the second time I've heard this remark from him. If it's not disingenuous, it's an important caveat to the idea of a two-state solution and has a folksy charm that's much more specific than the adjective "viable" that's often used to describe a future Palestinian state.

Otherwise, the American University of Beirut was full of students wearing black and white Palestinian keffiyehs in support of Gaza today. Interestingly enough, none of the Lebanese students I spoke with seemed to think that their support for their neighbors should extend to the Palestinians who were killed (around 50) or displaced (over 30,000) last year in Nahr el-Bared. They told me that the government had the right to go in and destroy the camp in order to root out the terrorists. When I asked them what the difference was between that and when Israelis use almost identical rhetoric, they insisted that the two situations had nothing in common. One student insisted that Palestinians didn't deserve any rights in Lebanon.

As usual, Lebanese solidarity with Palestinians seems to be more about opposing Israel than supporting Palestinians. Ya haram.

Saturday, March 01, 2008

Israel threatens Gazans with a "shoah"

I spend a lot of time getting annoyed when people throw around the word "genocide" or "holocaust" when it's not warranted. This often means rebuking Lebanese and Palestinian friends who want to call the Israeli occupation a genocide. The occupation is a lot of things, none of them savory, but a genocide it is not, and calling it one cheapens the word.

So you can imagine my surprise when I saw last night that Israel's deputy defense minister, Matan Vilnai, had threatened Palestinians in Gaza with a "shoah":

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - A senior Israeli defense official said on Friday that Palestinians firing rockets from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip would bring upon themselves what he termed a "shoah," the Hebrew word for holocaust or disaster.

The word is rarely used in Israel outside discussions of the Nazi Holocaust of Jews. Many Israelis are loath to countenance its use to describe other contemporary events. Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said the Palestinians faced "new Nazis."

Israeli air strikes have killed at least 33 Gazans, including five children, in the past two days. The army, which carried out additional air strikes on Friday, said most of those killed were militants.

I'm no Hebraist, but according to Reuters and common sense, "shoah," like "holocaust" isn't a word that's tossed around lightly in Israel. And whenever there's a comment by someone like Ahmadinejad, quoting Khomeini, saying that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time," we get Israel supporters clamoring for the world to denounce the genocidal intent of the Iranian regime. So will these same people condemn Israel's even more explicit language?

Just the other day on the Olin Institute's Middle Eastern Strategy at Harvard blog, Stephen Peter Rosen was making a fuss about a comment that Ahmadinejad made calling Israel a "black and dirty microbe," informing us that this change in discourse could be "associated with biological attacks or other unconventional mass killings." 

So since Rosen says that he's interested in tracking the discourse between Israel and Iran, I can imagine that the Harvard blog will soon have a post up warning of the impending "shoah" to be visited upon the Gazans. After all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

Of course not. If we look a the comments to Rosen's post, we're given the simple answer by Harvard's specialist on Armenia, James Russell, that "Ahmadinejad and Hezbollah are obviously murderous and crazy." I knew there was a simple answer!

UPDATE: Melanie Phillips at the Spectator is now claiming that "In Hebrew, the word ‘shoah’ is never used to mean ‘holocaust’ or ‘genocide’ because of the acute historical resonance." (Italics hers.) Someone should get Claude Lanzmann on the phone to let him know he's made a terrible mistake.

And for the record, the Israeli daily Ha'aretz has this to say about the remark:

Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai went as far as threatening a "shoah," the Hebrew word for holocaust or disaster. The word is generally used to refer to the Nazi Holocaust, but a spokesman for Vilnai said the deputy defense minister used the word in the sense of "disaster," saying "he did not mean to make any allusion to the genocide."