Showing posts with label middle east. Show all posts
Showing posts with label middle east. Show all posts

01 March 2011

Revolution extended


Dear readers,

It is a weakness of traditional media and particularly TV stations to select and filter information in a way which will hold in a traditional 25 minutes news bulletin. Unfortunately, this means that most channels and even newspapers will simply let some important pieces fall from the prime time news. This get even worse when there is abundance of events. No time was a better example of this than the last few weeks.

All over the media, we heard about Tunisia first, then the Egyptian Revolution, then the Libyan one, and so on. But this gave us, viewers, an illusion of succession of one crisis following the other. Expressions such as "domino effect" (an old Cold War word) only served to reinforce this feeling. Worse, it created an effect of the type "tree hiding the forest". Indeed, while these countries were making the front pages and prime-time news, several other were doing just the same in complete indifference.

Some Africans in Ivory Coast rightfully took umbrage, and tweeted a CNN journalist until he relented. But beyond the odd and fun news like this (although how fun is it when dozens of people are slaughtered in the mean time?), the fact is that we keep ignoring the forest of unrest on several continents. To avoid this, I have tried to gather a simple list of them. I'll try to update it as it goes. Let's call this the "Extended Revolutions", in no particular order.
  • Tunisia (after all, they were the spark in the powder keg).
  • Ivory Coast (although chronologically before Tunisia, it did not have the same international effect)
  • Egypt
  • Gabon
  • Cameroon
  • Iran
  • Lebanon
  • Armenia
  • China (although it took the form of a weird joke)
  • Azerbaijan
  • Libya
  • Algeria
  • Morocco
  • Jordan
  • Yemen
  • Bahrain
  • Oman
  • Mauritania
  • Djibouti
  • Saudi Arabia
  • Iraq
  • Angola (unsure of this one)
Various other countries shut down all communications very brutally after it began clear that the movement was exporting itself. So it might be very difficult to be sure of the actual extent of the rebellion. Don't hesitate to send me a message if I am missing or misrepresenting any of these.

22 February 2011

Europe and the Middle-East revolution

Dear readers,

After this very long pause in writing, I have been motivated by the Middle-East revolutions to put out this new piece. The main reason was my total disgust feeling when watching the reaction of European institutions and European countries to the insurrection.

I am not going to elaborate too much, but suffice to say that these reactions have varied from worried indifference to the most abject collaboration with the tyrants. I am no stranger to realpolitik and I am well aware that international politics aren't based on good feelings and kindness. Nevertheless, I think that it is the sign of a good statesman (or woman) to be able to recognize the momentum of History and at the very least to be able to capitalize on it. Our dear leaders have unfortunately shown nothing of this.

When Tunisia went into full revolutionary mode, the French government proposed to help the Tunisian dictatorship with crowd containment know-how and technology. When Egypt took the street, the only comments from German or Dutch elites was that the risk of the Muslim Brotherhood taking over was too big. It could have been a threat to... Israel. I am no Islamophile, but, let's face it, the complacency of the EU and Egypt towards Israel's apartheid policy has only made the Middle-East problems worst, not better. When Bahreini decided that they had enough, the only comment from our "lesson givers" was: beware of the pro-Iranian Shia majority. Now that Algeria and Lybia are in trouble, Berlusconi, Frattini and Schwarzenberg went very publicly on the record to express their support to Gaddafi. They were obviously terrified of a massive influx of refugees. Maltese authority were more discrete (at least they had some decency) but no less worried in their warning.

Unfortunately for all these despicable EU politicians, Bouteflika in Algeria and Gaddafi in Lybia decided to handle the matter the hard way. Algerian "security forces" (i.e. goons) simply beat up demonstrators into submission. Gaddafi forces went simply berserk on the people, shooting indiscriminately into the crowds with heavy weapons, sending its Air Force against rebelling cities and sniping people from the roofs. When Army and Air Force units refused to shoot at their own people, he used Ukrainian pilots and African mercenaries. Both are cheap and don't ask questions. The graphic videos and pictures filtering through the Lybian media shutdown are explicit enough: streets are littered with body parts and rubble. Hospitals are crowded, when they are not bombarded themselves.

One would expect from our dear politicians that they would at the very least resign. Don't hold your breath, though, that is not going to happen. Schwarzenberg (Czech Republic) was ashamed enough to say that his words had been taken out of context. In my opinion, the only lack of context (and his only excuse) was that he did not know the extent of the slaughter at the time. Anyway, honor and justice would require from them to politically fall on their swords, so to speak. That is not going to happen, so I won't hesitate: people of Europe, wake up! Demand the immediate resignation of all the politicians who knowingly lent a hand to the Maghreb tyrants (or still do so). Honestly, it won't be a big loss for Europe... And if they do not resign, let's take the street. After all, why would we always arrogantly pose ourselves in model to the Arab world? We can learn so much from it too.

05 July 2007

Alan Johnston Liberation

Dear readers,

It is an understatement to say that Alan Johnston liberation (without assault) is a major victory for Hamas. A victory on the international scene that it has began using on all channels at its disposal. Fair enough, we have to acknowledge that it has succeeded where Fatah was not able to do anything. Furthermore it has begun to restore (its) law and order in Gaza. It is no small feat, even if this has cost already many lives, mainly of Fatah members.

But there are other aspects to this. Hamas is claiming that Fatah is responsible for a situation where clans and mafias (such as the one which was holding Alan) were allowed to freely carry weapons and impose their own will. It is certainly true in a way. Fatah never really opposed the clans or the different militias in Gaza or in the West Bank. In some cases, it actually created or encouraged them. This said, it is a very ironical claim from a party which is actually arming a militia itself, outside of any legal process (if this has any meaning in the Palestinian Territories). Worse, this party, Hamas, has not hesitated to use this militia to fight physically "official" Palestinian security services. So it is clearly a sad case of bad faith from Hamas.

Let's not be too naive. Hamas, because it is less corrupt and more disciplined, also more fanatical than Fatah, will probably succeed in Gaza. But at which price will this come? It is pretty obvious that the Islamic Law will be applied (in whichever local Hamas oriented interpretation...). It is probably better than no law at all, in a sense, but it is a very bad thing for a big part of the million and a half Gaza citizens: women, Christians, secular Palestinians. Let's also not forget that Hamas is still a terrorist movement. It might show a nice face from time to time, but the fact is they never hesitated to use suicide bombers, slaughter of innocents, etc., sometimes just to make a point. OK, let's be fair in another way, their opponents are barely better (and Israel has not shown a lot more respect for innocent lives either).

And there is a third party that can still play a very nasty game. To continue "exist" in a political sense, Islamic Jihad will have to show some muscle pretty quickly. They are present in Gaza as well as the West Bank. I would not be surprised if they try to create some trouble in Gaza (to test Hamas new power) and in the West Bank... How Fatah, Hamas and Israel will react to this (end interact together) will probably be the key to Palestine's future.

27 June 2007

Tony Blair

Dear readers,

This is just an extra note in reaction to Tony Blair's proposed nomination as head of the "Quartet" team for the Middle-East conflict. As noted in several Arab newspapers today, Tony Blair seems to be a very strange choice for such a function. Al Quds quotes his remorseless participation to the Iraqi disaster, and it is an obvious one. The Arab newspaper also claims that Tony Blair has a bias towards Israel, which is less obvious to me. But I see another serious problem in letting Blair head the Quartet team. Blair does can't decently represent the EU in the Quartet, considering he always favored the USA when he was Prime Minister. Worse, his obvious ideological proximity with Georges W. Bush makes him a marked man, not so much biased towards Israel than towards the USA. I strongly believe that if Russia and the EU vote him in the position, they will have to regret it dearly later on. He is just too unreliable.