Rice’s show: Is it comedy or horror?

The Daily Star – Opinion Articles – Rice’s show: Is it comedy or horror?:

The most galling thing about Rice’s and Washington’s approach is its fundamental dishonesty. The Bush administration spent its first six years avoiding any serious engagement in the Arab-Israeli conflict, or decisively siding with the Israelis on most key contested points, like refugees, security or settlements. Now – with little time left for Rice, President George W. Bush on the ropes, his administration in tatters, America’s army in trouble in Iraq, Washington’s credibility shattered in the region and around the world, and the Middle East slipping into greater strife and dislocation – we are asked to believe that she will dedicate her remaining time in office to securing the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Does Rice take us in the Arab world for robotic idiots – simply another generation of hapless Arabs who have no options and must go along docilely with every American-Israeli initiative, no matter how insulting, insincere or desperate it may be? This initiative is all three.

The Rice approach is not serious because she does not prod Arabs and Israelis simultaneously to comply with the rule of law and United Nations resolutions. Instead, in her hasty and insincere diplomatic fishing expedition she casts her net wide in an attempt to catch enough “moderate Sunni Arabs” to play by American-Israeli rules. This is a direct consequence of two trends in the region for which the US must share much blame: the invasion and collapse of Iraq into sectarian strife that has started to spread throughout the region; and the persistence of pro-Israeli American policies for some four decades now, which have ultimately contributed to the birth of massive Arab Islamist movements that oppose Israel, side with Iran, and defy the US.

In other Arab summit related news, Qadhafi has apparently declared that Libya is an African state again and not concerned with Arab affairs.

0 thoughts on “Rice’s show: Is it comedy or horror?”

  1. Does Rice take us in the Arab world for robotic idiots – simply another generation of hapless Arabs who have no options and must go along docilely with every American-Israeli initiative, no matter how insulting, insincere or desperate it may be?

    No. However, we Americans believe that Arabs refuse to take personal responsibility for their government institutions. As an anti-colonial power, we usually only intervene when our nation’s security is at risk. There is no American standing behind King Hussein or Ariel Sharon telling them what to do.

    So the largest measure of responsibility for the messes of the middle east belongs to the Arabs themselves. We Americans get really really tired of conspiracy theories and twisty fictions that always seek to avoid Arab culpability in their own affairs, even as so many Arabs take advantage of Western (and yes, Israeli) generosity to pilfer aid meant to benefit their countrymen for personal advantage.

    If these words are “insulting”, well, so what?

  2. So propping up Mubarak with 1.3 billion in military aid annually does not make the US in the slightest culpable? That is only one example and there are plenty others. I agree that Arabs don’t take personal responsibility for alot of their ills, but to be honest to wash the US’ hands of any responsibility is naive.

  3. The money is meant for Egypt, not Mubarak. If the U.S. applied “pressure” by linking the aid explicitly to Mubarak’s political demise without a firm Egyptian grass-roots opposition movement ready to take the reins, don’t you think that the probable result would be a palace coup and a new dictator, one who smiles all the time because he knows that no matter what evils he commits the U.S. will be blamed?

    There is no American standing behind Mubarak telling him what to do, or standing with a chair at the ready in case he’s knocked down. He rules through the apathy created by his power to create illusions in men’s minds, through the brutal treatment of his people and the everyday injustices created by bypassing the courts.

    No revolution is required to overthrow him. The Egyptian people need only reclaim their Old Constitution and thus return government to its proper functions. All it takes is a little initiative, and the realization that the responsibility is their own.

  4. The money is military aid. Mubarak is commander in chief of the army, is an army and essentially uses the army and the security forces to maintain his grip on power. Besides, how can they reclaim the constitution if the Parliament – the only legitimate way to reclaim the constitution – is dominated by Mubarak’s party.

    The US should direct the aid away from military spending and towards USAID and promotion of civil society in Egypt. However, that is unlikely to happen anytime soon due to the fact that Egypt is a significant client of the US defence industry, who will lobby all they can to prevent any such change.

    Unfortunately, I am of the opinion that a revolution is required: not necessarily a bloody revolution but something sufficiently significant to awake the Egyptian populace from its slumber so that they can rip up the current constitution and start from scratch.

  5. how can they reclaim the constitution if the Parliament – the only legitimate way to reclaim the constitution – is dominated by Mubarak’s party.

    A Constitution is a tool of the people, and should be treated as such. The judges whose job it is to enforce it rebelled long ago. If enough citizens banded together with the purpose of enforcing its terms by demanding a caretaker government until internationally-superivised elections can be held in about a year, what chance would the Mubarak government have?

  6. “We intervene only when our nation’s security is at risk…” Oh, please. We have defined “national security” so broadly that if a mosquito sneezed on an American tourist in a region which would put certain financial deals at risk, we would do something. United Fruit Company ring a bell? The State Department is hardly so naive as to believe that money, specifically money marked “military aid” is going to felladin in the South. For Egypt (and others in the region) t be able to make a real go at democracy as a tool of the people- several things need to happen almost simutaneously (and probably a little slowly)- a) there cannot be an elected official for life, and there needs to be at least one person between president pere et fils, b) freedom of expression needs to be defined and respected, c) the wealthier classes need to relinquish their feelings of absolute privelege and start to take a real interest in the welfare of the country in general, d) the system of connections (piston) needs to be phased out, e) the lower classes need to demand that their education and skill sbe put to good use.
    Externally, the US needs to put its money where its mouth is and not prop up military spending in countries with these kinds of behaviors.
    As to constituional issues- what about the US Constitution? It’s about time the people took that back as well since this present Adminstration has been wiping its muddy Texas shitkickers all over it. Bceause if we won’t or can’t, how do you expect ordinary Egyptians to be able to do the same, given their conditions?

  7. United Fruit? The fact that you have to reach back over a generation to come up with a counter-example implies that supporting banana republics isn’t a priority any more, and that my evaluation of the situation may therefore be correct.

    I won’t argue your remarks about Egypt; they do not contradict my comments.

    As for the US Constitution: I think the Constitutional process is working pretty much as the Founders intended and even if it isn’t, why should the Egyptians need an example from another country to do what they need to for themselves?

  8. Such obvious ignorance about realities in Egypt doesn’t really merit a response, but what the hell.

    ‘The Egyptian people need only reclaim their Old Constitution and thus return government to its proper functions. All it takes is a little initiative, and the realization that the responsibility is their own.”

    Suggest you read a little bit, on this blog, about attempts by the Egyptian people to reclaim their constitution, and fight back against the police state, even for something as basic as judicial supervision of elections, with all the fun of being thrown in jail and beaten up and tortured for one’s pains (while trying to eke out a living with economic precarity and high inflation). Living in a police state is not pretty and peaceful petitions and protests don’t get you very far. The regime has done a remarkably good job of making people terrified of political activism. If you’re still convinced that it’s an easy job, please have a go at it yourself.

  9. I have read about Egyptians fighting back against the police state, but not about them taking the initiative to re-establish their Constitution and keep most of the laws and instruments of the state intact, as I describe. For this I plead ignorance, and if you could direct me to the specific and appropriate posts on any blog I’d gladly read them and return to this page to admit my errors.

    If you’re still convinced that it’s an easy job, please have a go at it yourself.

    I have. Read my blog for the report. My fellow demonstrators did not lack the courage, drive, and initiative to protest against the Mubarak gang. What they seem unwilling to do is to seek to assume executive power and temporarily lead the government themselves.

  10. Plenty of other exampes byond United Fruit, trust me. The US Constitutional process isnot working is the Founders intended. We have a president who has countervned article VI of the Constitution regarding the respect of sgned and ratified international treaties, he has thimbed his nose both at the legislative and the judicial. He has stepped waaaay out of bounds on domestic surveillance, made a mockery of Habeus Corpus, turned us clearly down the path of offensive engagement, and allowed his officials to misuse the 5th while trampling Civil Rights. The American public is so ignorant of its rights and obligations that it cannot and will not admit it is being slowly led down the garden path to a nominal democracy. The use of the National Guard in Iraq/Afghanistan is especially troublesome because it smacks of a forethought regarding civil insurgency- this is not unheard of- in California Governor Reagan trained the California National Guard in anticipation of Berkeley rising up. In the fitst Gulf War, the California National Guard was at the ready, and relocation (a la Executive Order 9066) plans were in teh wings should the Arab/Palestinain population aroung LA become a problem.
    There are individual voices, but when you have a VP who trots out the old You don’t support the troops whine to round on the Congress- shades of McCarthy, Nixon et al- either the Senate stops being the spineless jellyfish they have been for the last 6 years or they impeach.And the people demand their rights. I don;t hear much, do you? Imagine, then, how much hareder this is in a police state like Egypt. I couldn’t dare imgaine it in Morocco, for example, and things aren’t nearly so bad (well, it’s relative, I guess).

  11. “A Constitution is a tool of the people, and should be treated as such. The judges whose job it is to enforce it rebelled long ago. If enough citizens banded together with the purpose of enforcing its terms by demanding a caretaker government until internationally-superivised (sic) elections can be held in about a year, what chance would the Mubarak government have?”

    How is that not a revolution? You’ve just contradicted yourself.

  12. Because it is not a matter of overthrowing the entire government, but rejecting the current leadership to returning government institutions to their original purpose. We’re talking 1776 here, not 1789.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *