Media Punditry and Power Sniffers

Every one, even the best, can be wrong. None of us are immune. But certain pundits blaze paths to simplistic conclusions based on claims that have little basis in data. Their assertions actually reflect a sub-conscious (my psychologizing here) desire to preserve the familiar and the well-trod paths of individuals who make themselves feel important by hanging out with one another in select groups of the self-appointed, golden, anointed ones.

Tom Friedman (and David Brooks and even Brett Stevens, and many other media darlings) fall into that category. They are what I call power-sniffers. Sometimes they have good things to say, and I respect them for that (I just posted something from Stevens today criticizing Israel because it a was good essay). But a lot of time they aggravate the hell out of me because they so very much crave to support old institutions, the familiar power circles, and the arguments that play well among the kinds of people who come from well-heeled backgrounds–the kinds of people who don’t ever really get to know how regular people live and what they’re thinking

Tom Friedman did this in “The World is Flat.” Obviously, world events have totally proven this thesis not only wrong, but profoundly wrong, especially in the U.S.–where we have never seen such a sharp division between rich and poor and the educated and not-as-well educated. The world still looks rather mountainous to me.

And now again we find the promise of Friedman shattered on the rocks of a horrifying murder of Jamal Khashoggi, apparently ordered by a cruel tyrant, posing as a modernizing member of a royal family–the very same prince to whom Friedman has cozied up and whom Friedman has praised for his visionary leadership of Saudi Arabia.

I’m not saying that we should be never pay attention to the favored clubby pundits that grace PBS, NPR, and the New York Times. They too have useful things to say. But, from now on, let us be more cautions when we read them (or listen to them). And may they use their powerful stoops to mix with the hoi-polloi and learn what real life is for a lot of people who do not run in the rarefied air of their intellectual circles.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/10/09/end-saudi-whisperer/?utm_term=.7cb11b35433f

Digiprove sealCopyright secured by Digiprove © 2018 Laurence Kant
Share

New Alliances in the Middle East

It seems that Egypt, the PLO, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE–more or less in conjunction with Israel–now find themselves in alliance against Hamas, Qatar, and Turkey.

You would not know this from PLO rhetoric against the Israeli attacks on Gaza, but, behind the scenes, Netanyahu and the Israeli coalition are generally on relatively good terms with PLO/Egypt/Saudi Arabia/UAE at the moment. They are also all mad at Kerry and Obama for helping out Qatar and Turkey who are helping Hamas (at least that’s their point of view).

There is a powerful desire on the part of many Arab leaders, including the PLO, to get rid of Hamas once and for all. What no one says publicly is that quietly they support Israel’s incursion into Gaza.

It’s not clear, however, whether getting rid of Hamas is actually a good idea–which may be what’s motivating Kerry/Obama. In Hamas’ place, more radical leadership of Gaza could emerge, like Iranian-supported Islamic Jihad. Or Gaza could turn into Beirut from the 1970s and 1980s.

More likely the Egypt/PLO/Saudi Arabia/UAE/Israel alliance may be looking to weaken Hamas to such an extent that it can no longer threaten the PLO/Fatah or Israel. When you’re engaged in a massive operation like Protective Edge, that’s a narrow bridge to traverse (weaken, but don’t destroy, Hamas), and they may or may not find themselves successful.

I’m sure U.S. leaders are concerned about this. They also want to use Qatar and Turkey as intermediaries to reach out to Hamas. However, I’m not sure they know what they’re doing. By supporting the Qatar/Tukey proposal and dissing the PLO and al-Sisi (Egypt), they may (I worry) be undermining Netanyahu and Yaalon who have never wanted a full frontal attack on Hamas. But I don’t have all the information and reserve judgement at this time.

Of course, coalitions like these are moving targets and change shape at a moment’s notice. These could be alliances of very short-term convenience. We shall see where they all end up, but, given modern history, the newshape of Middle East diplomacy is fascinating (though painful and tragic), to say the least.

 

**I’m really not sure where Iran is on this. On the one hand, they are opposed to Hamas (Sunni Muslim Brotherhood vs. Shia; and Hamas supported Sunni insurgents against Syrian Assad). However, they have changed their tune a bit recently. By supporting Hamas against Israel and against PLO/Fatah, Iran could get a lot of brownie points from the broader Arab populace which supports Palestinians in general. The Iranians are probably playing it both ways actually.

Digiprove sealCopyright secured by Digiprove © 2014 Laurence Kant
Share

Saudi Arabia and Revolution

The situation is ripe for change in Saudi Arabia, but the country could end up divided between young, tech-savvy, democratic secularists, anti-democratic Wahabi Islamists, and restless Shiites:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/02/28/yes_it_could_happen_here

Share

Democracy, the Middle East and Israel

The US and the West are essentially tourists in the Middle East, while Israelis are residents:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/charlesmoore/8348516/Libya-What-happens-after-we-stop-watching-these-revolutions-against-Col-Gaddafi.html

Conservative Fouad Adjami has faith in Arab democratic movements and their implications for Israel
http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/week-s-end/mideast-unrest-is-a-change-the-world-should-believe-in-scholar-says-1.345607

Also the road to democracy is long.  Democracy is not an election or majority rule, but many elections, tolerance for minority rights, and the growth of democratic institutions
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/the-long-road-to-democracy-1.345581

Conservative Daniel Pipes is optimistic about democracy:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/260923/my-optimism-new-arab-revolt-daniel-pipes

I don’t agree with this negative analysis, but it’s worth paying attention to. Benny Morris could well be correct, at least in the short term.  In the long run, I still bet on freedom.
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/losing-middle-east-4921

Kevin Myers also has doubts about the possibility of true democracy in the Middle East:
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-little-hope-of-democracy-as-arab-despots-overthrown-2549977.html

Tzipi Livni advocates a code for democracies:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/23/AR2011022305364.html

In Gaza, Islamist Hamas restricts the rights of secular individuals and groups, which are the cornerstone of a democratic society: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/25/AR2011022500824.html

In this interesting piece, Nick Cohen argues that Europe’s obsession with Israel has promoted dictatorships in the Middle East: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/feb/27/nick-cohen-arab-middle-east-conflict

Robert Kaplan argues that democracy will be more about the establishment of authority than the restraint of it and that Turkey will have substantial influence as it did in the Ottoman period:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/25/AR2011022506229.html

I recall the peaceful nature of the demonstrations in Egypt and Tunisia.  Even Libya was initially peaceful, but the protesters had to defend themselves when Qaddafi started massacring them.  This bodes well, and I remain optimistic in the longer-term (10-15 years).

Share

Liberal Support For Middle East Dictators

Many commentators (including me) have noted conservative support for Arab/Islamic dictatorships in the Middle East.  But this is no less true of the left who have readily defended tyranny in Iran and other places while condemning Israel, which is a democratic state.  Here is an essay on this by Alan Dershowitz.

I find it intriguing that ideologues (whether conservative or liberal) are much more likely than non-ideologues to shelve their supposed principles when an article of their ideology is under threat.  Here the left shelves democracy in order to affirm underdog Arab/Muslim societies and to condemn bully Israel.  Some on the right do the same by supporting dictatorships in Egypt and Saudi Arabia (for example), claiming that stability trumps democracy–except when the US invaded Iraq.

http://www.hudson-ny.org/1860/hard-left-arab-despotism

Share

Social Widgets powered by AB-WebLog.com.

Follow

Follow this blog

Get every new post delivered right to your inbox.

Email address