#1
Sovereign Deed is a company providing evacuation & many other services, along the same line as in the cited article. I imagine that there are many other companies.
CNN reports President Barack Obama made clear in interviews Tuesday with the three major US television networks that he was open to arming the rebel fighters. This comes as leaders in London declared they were not unalterably opposed to the Duck of Death going into exile.
[Asharq al-Aswat] The worst thing that the Shiite opposition in Bahrain could do now is to accept external mediation to resolve their problems with the government, because this would have serious consequences for the opposition itself, even if Kuwait were to mediate.
By merely accepting Kuwaiti mediation, this is a genuine sectarian move on the part of the opposition. The Shiite opposition criticized the decision to send the Peninsula Shield force to Bahrain, although the force was deployed to maintain security and not to deal with the demonstrators. The opposition considered this to be a form of 'Saudi occupation', and defamed Riyadh in the Western media, even though the Saudi troops were accompanied by the rest of the Peninsula Shield forces, which entered Bahrain in accordance with a Gulf convention that has stood for nearly 30 years. How can the opposition say all this, and then accept Kuwaiti mediation between them and the government? Is this because Kuwait hesitated to send troops to Bahrain, or is it in response to sectarian advice from within Kuwait?
Of course, I have nothing but the utmost love and respect for Kuwait. I previously commended the Emir of Kuwait's initiative to resolve the dispute between Oman and the UAE, but now I also criticize the proposal for Kuwaiti mediation in Bahrain. What Kuwait accomplished between Muscat and Abu Dhabi was both necessary and praiseworthy, because it purified the relationship between two Gulf States. However, The emphatic However... mediation in Bahrain would mean interfering between a particular component of society, and the government, and this model has no parallel other than in Leb, where everyone acts as mediator to solve the country's problems with the Iranian-sponsored Hezbullies. Is this what the Bahraini opposition wants? This is incomprehensible, even if the Bahraini government agreed to it, or if the initiative was sponsored by the UAE, Qatar or Soddy Arabia.
Bahrain must not become another Leb. Rather we must enhance the sense of citizenship in our countries, and our region, instead of entrenching the sense of sectarianism which is manipulated by external forces. The Gulf States have a problem with the Iranian regime, not its citizens, and not the Shiites. Citizenship should be all-encompassing, and it is wrong to classify between components, not just in Bahrain but in all Gulf States. The fear is that the Bahraini opposition wants to manipulate Kuwaiti mediation in order to embarrass the Gulf States, but the truth is that the opposition will only embarrass themselves, because they are repeating a universally rejected model, that of Hezbullies.
Consequently, my message to the Gulf States is that the Shiites are citizens like everyone else. My message to the Bahraini opposition is that they have committed an age old mistake by declaring a sectarian identity, and advocating the use of external mediation to solve domestic problems. This would be the last thing any rational observer would wish for, even if it came from a trusted mediator such as Kuwait. Thus it is up to the Bahraini opposition to choose their own form: Do they want to be like the Houthis in Yemen, when Qatar served as a mediator? Do they want to be like Hezbullies, which would be the worst possible outcome? Or do they want to be like the Kuwaiti opposition, incorporating both Sunnis and Shiites, who did not accept foreign interference between them and their government, not even in the darkest of times, and did not raise the ceiling of their demands, or exploit the Arab scene and its emergency circumstances, as the Shiite opposition in Bahrain are doing today. Thus the Bahraini opposition must choose the most appropriate model, because everything has its price!
True, true. One wonders if a Shiite will be invited to write a response, or if there are any of that persuasion on staff who might do so.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/30/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
As I understand it, the author-- Walter Russell Mead-- is a Democrat who supported the Iraq War and voted for 0bama in 2008.
The failure of blue social policy to create an environment which works for Blacks is the most devastating possible indictment of the 20th century liberal enterprise in the United States. Helping Blacks achieve the kind of equality and opportunity long denied them was more than one of many justifications for blue social policy: it was the defining moral task that has challenged and shaped American liberalism for the last fifty years.
The Census tells us that in the eyes of those who know best, these well intentioned efforts failed. Instead of heaven, we have hell across Americas inner cities. Blue economic policy has cut the creation of new private sector jobs to a trickle in our great cities, while the high costs of public union urban services (and policies that favor government employees over the citizenry at large) impose crippling taxes and contribute to the ruinously high costs that blight opportunity. All the social welfare bureaucracies, diversity counselors and minority set-asides cant make up for the colossal failure of blue social policy to create sustainable lower middle class prosperity in our cities. RTWT
My tentative conclusion is that we have a new definition of "sovereign". Sovereign nations have nukes. Those who do not have nukes are not sovereign and may be judged by the UN Security Council, and possibly by American Intellectuals, and deposed by Great Powers acting in concert, or even by UN "Peace Keeping" forces depending on the military strength of the non-sovereign. Non-sovereign states may be overthrown.
Sovereign nations have nukes. Sovereign nations can exterminate dissenters in any manner they choose. They may indulge in ethnic cleansing at whim. All those who do not have nukes exist at the sufferance of the Great Powers. If you have nukes -- China, North Korea, Israel -- and a loyal army, you are pretty well safe from rebellion. If you have a loyal army but no nukes that is no longer true. Iran, Burma, Syria, Hamas in Gaza, and various other such states will take note: indeed already have.
#3
"Get off the imported oil addiction and my personal favourite, kill the renewable energy nonsense dead." And Obama will strut out today and announce his intention to do the exact opposite.
#4
But then I will happily see the entire Arab world go to complete ratshit.
Not me. It would have taken 30 years or so to get off the imported oil addiction, 30 years which the US and its allies have UTTERLY WASTED. Now all of us must suffer the consequences, including a huge spike in the cost of imported oil, or maybe even domestic rationing. The oil ticks fighting each other will be a side show compared to that.
[Asharq al-Aswat] Let us assume that the Syrian domino will follow the same path as Tunisia and Egypt. Then let our imaginations take us far far away where, in the blink of an eye, the person who will win the upcoming presidential elections in Syria is an ideal and exceptional figure with similar characteristics to the Rightly Guided Caliph Omar Ibn al Khaddab (may God be pleased with him) with regards to fairness, decisiveness, austerity and strength. Can you imagine that with limited sources of national income this "Omar-like" president will do away with unemployment and will solve the problems of poverty and housing and the major problems regarding the youth? Can you imagine that he will turn Syria into a country where the people will not find anyone in need of Zakat [charity]? It is not necessary that these ideal characteristics exist in any leader around the world to transform his country into Plato's republic. There is a lot of historical evidence from the biographies of just leaders, Mohammedan and non-Mohammedan alike, that nations are willing to accept and love the leader and be truly loyal to him even if they, along with him, live on water and dates, and this is on the condition that he lays the foundation for fairness.
This is exactly what the Syrian government has failed to understand. In an attempt to contain the tension and the demonstrations that broke out in the several Syrian cities, the government recently embarked boldly upon making promises that lacked real political reforms. For this reason these promises were met coldly by the Syrian nation and in order for us to realize that there is a large gap between the Syrian government's "non-reform" promises and the real demands made by the Syrian street, a Syrian academic sent a strong-worded letter to President Assad reproaching him for not releasing political prisoners and not bringing the emergency laws to an end.
There are two main factors in these demands that would trouble any nation in this world; one is gaining freedoms by lifting martial law and releasing "non-criminal" prisoners, many of whom were thrown into prison and have remained there for several years without trial or through unjust military courts that are authorized under emergency law just like in Tunisia and Egypt. It is interesting that the release of such prisoners is one of the biggest concerns the people have even if they are not related to the prisoners or know them personally. This became noticeable in the popular demands that followed the outbreak of the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Algeria and of course the people who are excluded from this are those who were involved in terrorist activity harming state security and society. The second factor is fighting corruption.
There was a very big chance that Syria would eventually be affected by the Arab tsunami [of revolutions] that swept Egypt and Tunisia and that is now sweeping Yemen and Libya. However instead of the Syrian government making the most of this delay by implementing pre-emptive and preventative strikes through the implementation of major reforms, what we saw was the complete opposite. The Syrian government was overcome by self-conceit and felt it was an exception and not vulnerable to the anger in its troubled Arab surroundings. It believed that its leaders were protected by a solid front and that confronting Israel would grant it immunity and a blank cheque to do what it wants to its people. This is the worst kind of blackmail and regrettably this kind of blackmail has been seen in the Arab world before. [Hosni] Mubarak used this approach when he reminded his people of his feats in the October War. Qadaffy condemned anyone who was against "the glory of Libya" which resisted Italian colonialism "house by house and street by street," and now the Yemeni president is reminding Yemen of his great contribution to uniting the two parts of Yemen. They all delayed in implementing reform measures and all of them claimed to be different and now they have all become lessons for people to learn from.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/30/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Syria
When educators who are identified as professors from prestigious universities testify before Congress, write op-eds, and appear on public or media sponsored panels, most readers and listeners value their words more than those of others less credentialed. Perhaps this is especially the case when the subject is foreign affairs, which without warrant is generally treated as an arcane subject requiring considerable specialized study to fully comprehend.
For this reason, concern is growing that our universities, especially those highly regarded, have been receiving very large sums of cash from abroad, often from countries or citizens of countries which hold positions antithetical to our interests or engage in conduct shocking to our values. This matter is receiving critical attention from both sides of the political spectrum.
The fact of these large gifts is no secret. 20 USC 1011-Sec. 1011f requires colleges and universities to disclose foreign donations and contracts valued at $250,000 or more, and the Department of Education annually posts them online on its website.
Today, the Chronicle of Higher Education published an article by Scott Carlson on the subject (subscription only). Reviewing the latest such report from the DOE (the next is due next month), he notes:
Over the past 10 years, gifts from and contracts with governments, companies, and individuals [in the Middle East] have amounted to more than $600 million.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
