|
|
|
|
Please provide your name or a
pen name, and your country of residence.
Lengthy letters run the risk of being cut.
Please note: This Letters page is intended primarily for
readers to comment on ATol articles or related issues. It should not be used as
a forum for readers to debate with each other.
The Edge is the place for that. The editors do not mind publishing one
or two responses to a reader's letter, but will, at their
discretion, direct debaters away from the Letters page.
JULY 2008
[Re Paulson
still doesn't get it, July 31] Wall Street and the US financial
community had high hopes when former CEO of Goldman Sachs Henry "Hank" Paulson
become President George W Bush's Secretary of the Treasury. He brought more
than a glimmer of hope that America's ailing economy would benefit from his
long experience. Sorry to say, as Peter Morici archly writes, Paulson has
turned in a lackluster performance in an economy wrecked by subprime mortgages
and a rapidly softening housing market. Paulson's nostrums are ones that hardly
restore confidence in the financial markets or address fundamentals in the
economy. They are but a patch here and a patch there in a leaky ship of state
which he is trying to keep afloat until a new president is in the White House.
But time and the economy are not on his side; the more he prays to the saints
of laissez faire, the more hopeless the situation seems. And as Morici
concludes, why should anyone who values a dollar trust Paulson to rejuvenate
commercial banking?
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Jul 31, '08)
Is Taru Taylor suggesting in Red
neon cross lights up Koreans that being a Christian in the Republic of
Korea today is a traitorous act; that a Christian allegiance is allegiance to a
foreign religion symbolized by a cross, thereby questioning the fidelity and
honor that [a Christian] pays to the Taegukgi (the Republic of Korea's national
flag)? Perhaps Taylor should tell that to President Lee Myung-bak, a confirmed
evangelical Christian, or to former president Kim Dae-jung, a Roman Catholic.
Taylor should read more Korean history - which did not stop with the Tonghak in
mid-19 century. Had Taylor turned the pages of a history book, he or she might
have learned of the role Christians in Korea played in the March 1, 1919,
demonstration against occupying Japan, for example. Taylor's reading of Korean
history is narrow and selective at best.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Jul 31, '08)
[Re Breaking
dollar's hegemony [July 29]. Although it is true that hot money is
rushing into China due to the country's bright economic outlook, the Chinese
central bank is, in my view, also culpable in encouraging this dangerous inflow
of capital. Over the past two years, the yuan has steadily strengthened from an
8.1:1 yuan-to-dollar ratio to the current 6.8:1 rate without any interruptions
or surprises along the way. This smooth and orderly process of appreciation
simply has been all too predictable and has made currency speculators' job far
too easy. As no economy, not even one with a $1.8 trillion reserve, can afford
to be held captive to the whims of global currency speculative forces, China
likely will suffer dearly in another round of Asian financial crisis. That
crisis, however, may also spell the end of dollar hegemony as countries around
the world finally tire of paying hefty tolls for a highly manipulated fiat
currency that is devoid of any material basis.
John Chen
USA (Jul 30, '08)
[Re Temple spat
may delay oil riches, July 29] The ongoing standoff between Thailand
and Cambodia is a great example of a political football. The earlier part of
the current fuss began ironically when the Thai foreign ministry agreed to let
Cambodia list Preah Vihear with United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as a Word Heritage Site. This gave advantages to
both sides: the Hun Sen government could claim a nationalist victory ahead of
the general elections, while the Thais could use the removal of this diplomatic
obstacle to join the Chinese, Koreans and Vietnamese in fully exploiting
Cambodia's natural resources. However, the Thai opposition saw this as a
useful, if cynical, opening to attack the Samak Sundaravej government on
patriotic grounds. Which brought the situation to stage two: the Samak
government escalated the conflict by sending troops into Cambodian territory,
and this again offered advantages to both regimes. By going military, the Samak
government stole the opposition's patriotic thunder; likewise Hun Sen's
regime's staunch defense of Cambodian land strengthened his party's hand in
last weekend's general elections, and has effectively silenced the opposition.
This conflict will probably resolve itself once the elections are over.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Jul 30, '08)
I would like to start a contest for loyal ATolites to guess who Spengler is
going to pander to without clicking on the link to his latest [Why
do nations exist?, July 29]. A brief list, so far, includes the Pope
and his many divisions, Europeans having more babies ... Israel being happier
than necessary despite being donkey punched in south Lebanon, sub-Saharan
Africans rising up and eradicating epi-Saharan Africans, Russians invading Iraq
to relieve the US, and now the emergence of supra-ethnic states like India and
China and which naturally include the US. The purpose of all this frenetic
activity is what really turns Spengler on - eradication of that which occupies
the middle - or at least what he daydreams about. There is only one rule in
this contest: No clicking on the link. Losers are those who write in a tirade
the next day. All others win.
Idi Xamin (Jul 29, '08)
Bravo M K Bhadrakumar!
Snub for Iran eases nuclear crisis [July 29] says what the media have
shied away from saying: the inching closer of Russia and China towards the EU
and Washington on the question of Tehran's nuclear program. However, it is not
so much Iran that is worrying Moscow and Beijing but the sudden emergence of
Turkey as a player in the game. Suddenly the ground rules in Central Asia and
the preponderant role of China and Russia are challenged. Turkey may very well
serve as a model for the Turkic speaking, overwhelming Muslim populations of
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, the other countries making
up the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and thus play havoc with
Moscow's and Beijing's designs to checkmate the growing role and presence of
the US in what these two capitals consider their own turf. By denying Iran
entrance into the SCO, Russia and China have not only enhanced the historic
role of Turkey in Central Asia but have allowed Washington to remain in the
region.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Jul 29, '08)
The article A
glimmer of hope for Nepal [July 25] by Asia Times Online - a most
popular, widely read online news [site] - [did] a really appreciative job of
knowing the current situation of Nepal. Writer Dhruba Adhikary's efforts to
present the factual findings and the on-the-ground reality as always give
readers great satisfaction. That is why his great and hard job needs to be
credited and thanked. I fully agree [with] the concluding remark made by
writer, "But ideology and long -term commitments are hardly a matter of
immediate concern. What is at stake is power and how to reach it. And all 25
parties represented in the assembly want their share of the cake." ...
Dibakar Pant
USA (Jul 29, '08)
The issues in the US presidential campaign making news headlines have included
everything from the war in Iraq down to inane questions of patriotism - but
have conspicuously excluded the Kyoto Protocol, a proposal by mad scientists
that the earth's temperature can be raised or lowered by controlling carbon
dioxide emissions from fossil fuels. We may infer from its absence that the
Kyoto Protocol is dead, and that, with any luck, it will soon to be just as
stone dead as its predecessor the Montreal Protocol that we were told back then
was our only salvation from death by UV radiation. It was based on the madness
that natural cyclical changes in the ozone layer of the atmosphere were caused
by human activity. Neither of these protocols are benign. Bad science makes for
bad policy and bad policy is injurious to society.
Cha-am Jamal
Thailand (Jul 29, '08)
Sudha Ramachandran's piece
Yarchagumba! It's caterpillar cocktail time [July 26] is utterly
pathetic in that it implies that the Chinese athletes were able to achieve what
they had achieved in the ranks of international competitive sports through
doping, including using the magical fungus Yarchagumba. This is not the first
time we have heard something like this from the Indians. Ramachandran mentioned
some smugglers were caught in India, but she did not elaborate as to how she
knows they were heading to China. And if the Chinese got caught as early as
1993 and as late as 2000, as Ramachandran alleged, wouldn't the IOC have done
something in the past eight years to look into this? The other thing is, since
2000, has the Chinese performance at the Olympics and various other
international tournaments seen any drastic improvement or deterioration?
Instead of sourly suggesting that the Chinese couldn't have gotten where they
are without the magical Yarchagumba, the Indians could ask the International
Olympic Committee to launch a formal investigation on the fungus trade and the
Chinese. Better yet, the Indians could teach the Chinese a thing or two by
improving their abysmal performance at the Olympics.
Juchechosunmanse
Beijing (Jul 28, '08)
[Re Pakistan draws
a bead on Baitullah, July 26] Salaam, sir....Do you have any reasons
why Baitullah Mehsud is not an Indian and/or United States agent? Can you share
some of the reasons? Wasalam. Nawjawan
Pakistan (Jul 28, '08)
International intelligence agencies do use such networks ... Although agent
provocateurs and the Pakistani state apparatus believe [this might be so], so
far, except for a link to a Middle Eastern sheikhdom, no direct link with
Mehsud has been traced that could brand him as a direct American or Indian
proxy against the state of Pakistan.
- Syed Saleem Shahzad (Jul 28, '08)
[ Re Taliban: A new
breed of leader I have been a regular reader of your articles on Asia
Times Online and appreciate the depth and knowledge you bring to your analyses.
I recently saw your interview of a Taliban military commander [Qari Ziaur
Rahman] whose video you had placed on the website. I was a little dismayed that
you did not ask him more probing questions regarding Baitullah Mehsud and the
devastation the Pakistani Taliban are bringing upon Pakistan. I am from a
village not too far from Waziristan and I can assure you that the ordinary
people of my village, many people in Dera Ismail Khan and certainly my many
friends in Peshawar are losing their patience with the Taliban. The Taliban are
definitely getting many jihadi recruits, but it won't be long before a
situation similar to Anbar province (Iraq) starts up in the North-West Frontier
Province. Already the Awami National Party has started town defense committees.
We all know the Pakistan Army has failed miserably but the local Pukhtuns will
take the fight to these murderers and when that happens we will make sure that
no prisoners are taken.
Yusaf Khan (Jul 28, '08)
Commander Qari Ziaur Rahman is Afghan Talib and Afghan Taliban do not speak on
Pakistani Taliban affairs. - Syed Saleem Shahzad
(Jul 28, '08)
[Re A Turkish
theater for World War III*, July 25] I truly enjoyed reading this
absorbing article by Chan Akya. His line of argument, like the plot of a
gripping novel, compels (at least temporarily) suspension of disbelief. His
conclusions are all fiction nonetheless. That is, I have no doubt that the
region's thoroughly despotic Sunni Arab leaders are being prodded by their
American masters to encircle and threaten Iran. However, convincing the
region's Sunni Arab populations that Shi'ites are the enemy is probably
something that even Saudi money cannot buy. Besides, they tried it recently in
Lebanon - we all know how well that went.
Jose R Pardinas, PhD
San Diego (Jul 25, '08)
[Re A Turkish
theater for World War III*, July 25] I think that Chan Akya should do
everyone a favor and stick to the matter of economics where he does display
some flashes of occasional competence. His forays in geopolitics are not
terribly impressive at this point. Anyway, is Chan Akya actually that Chinese
Christian convert and Zionist zealot with clear genocidal tendencies that you
call Spengler? [Is he] just trying to look smart? Too late for that.
Oleg Beliakovich,
Seattle (Jul 25, '08)
[Re The
death-knell of Bernankeism, July 23] Wow, the Dow dropping down to
4,500 points? I bet Martin Hutchinson doesn't get invited often to give
inspirational speeches. "Congratulations graduates, your future looks as bright
as the mid-day sun. By the way, the Dow Jones Industrial Average may go down
70% in the next few years; good luck." Gee, thanks Martin! While it's true that
the short-to-intermediate-term economic outlook isn't all that rosy, a
financial market doomsday (which a 7,000-point fall in DJIA would entail) seems
a bit of a stretch. As interconnected as the global economy is, financial pains
in the US would be felt keenly across the world. As such, one would think that
other countries would feel the need to help America to avert disaster. In fact,
as we speak, the US may be bargaining with China for assistance in combating a
probable financial market meltdown. While David Isenberg enumerated a number of
reasons for the recent decision by the Bush administration to suspend arms
sales to Taiwan [US
keeps Taiwan at arm's length, July 23] from the historical,
geopolitical, and commercial perspectives, it's difficult to fathom that the US
would be so considerate of China's sensitivities. More likely, some kind of
quid pro quo is being discussed behind the scenes. Question is, is the
arms-sales freeze all that China would ask for? Let's stay tuned.
John Chen
USA (Jul 25, '08)
Regarding Step by step
to democracy in China by Kent Ewing on July 25, the succinct essence is
in: China's move toward greater democracy is set to happen at such a
carefully slow pace that it is likely to go largely unnoticed in the West. But
it is nonetheless a potentially significant development not just for China but
also for the rest of the world, which will have to deal with China as a major
power in the 21st century. A less corrupt, more efficient, more humane China is
in everyone's interest - whether or not the democracy it practices passes the
Western litmus test. . I suggest that three groups of people,
in particular, ruminate on this essence. First, the nationalistic in China
should know that the obligatory hope of the West for an acceptable China is its
greatest and the most lasting leverage. The China-is-already-great crowd may
regard the allusion to hope for an acceptable China as an affront. They then
become cynical and contrive ways to vilify the West. They seem to prefer losing
gloriously over winning humbly. It seems that the top leadership in China,
however, senses that China is winning humbly. Second, the Western dogmatic
ideologists may lament the Chinese charade of democracy as exploitation of the
great obligatory hope. I suggest that China can only creep toward democracy
when the Chinese slowly feel that they prefer democracy. Realistically, the
West has little alternative influence. Such a charade does give the Chinese a
taste of democracy. The Chinese leadership has allowed three sites for open,
observed, and organized protests with restrictions during the Olympic Games.
The fact is that the Chinese people can see such government sanctioned protests
and can decide if this is the preferred future for their country. The
leadership can also test to see whether such sanctioned organized protests are
manageable. Besides, the West also places restrictions on organized protests.
Third, those who think that a more democratic mainland China will lead to
Tibetan cultural preservation or Taiwan independence should realize that
democracy (even if it were relevant, I think not) will come too late for their
cause. For Tibet, social/economic progress enhances assimilation, ie same
race-different culture with overwhelming dominance of the majority, which does
not shun cultural contamination by policy. For Taiwan, its geography will
likely vitiate any chance of independence, and there will be no war. Taiwan as
a resource-poor island will be ever increasingly and abjectly vulnerable from
mild-mannered but profound economic influence from afar. After the Tibet and
Taiwan issues have been settled, China can be expected to be less rigid on the
concept of recognized sovereignty of nations, correspondingly.
Jeff Church
USA (Jul 25, '08)
[Re Unsolicited
advice for Bush on Iran, July 24] The ongoing chorea Machabaeprum
[dance of death] adapted by President George W Bush from "A New Strategy for
Securing the Realm" as envisaged by Richard Perle, Benjamin Netanyahu and other
neo-cons to redraw a whole new map for the Middle East to accommodate Israel's
vision is at a point where Shylock in Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice is
demanding "the pound of flesh which ... is dearly bought. 'Tis mine and I will
have it". This crossing at a major fork in the road scenario must have
influenced Jim Lobe in urging Bush to listen to General [Brent] Scowcroft and
Mr [Zbigniew] Brzezinski's views on Iran. While Lobe concludes his commentary
with admonitions to Israel "... [which] may be preparing to take unilateral
military action against Iran's nuclear facilities, Brzezinski said it would not
be a 'smart strategic choice' due to the likelihood that the US would even
become 'more bogged down' in the region. Scowcroft said he would tell the
Israelis to 'calm down'." Given its past histories, the Middle East cannot
shake its infatuation with the danse macabre.
Armand De Laurell (Jul 24, '08)
Russia is key to
North Korea's plight [July 24] deserves attentive reading for what it
says and for what it does not say. Dr Leonid Petrov has brushed a quick
overview of the role energy-rich and cash-flush Russia can play in North Korea.
In historical terms, it is retroactive and is clearcut in ambiguous historical
imponderables. And although Moscow can furnish Pyongyang with electrical power
and much needed oil and gas, the reader has no notion as to the abject state of
North Korea's infrastructure. Its power stations with Soviet-made equipment,
for example, are either in disrepair, rusted or simply not up to the task of
furnishing North Korea with the electricity that it needs for economic revival.
Pyongyang has a long memory of slights; it cannot nor won't forget that the
Soviet Union had reneged on a promise to Kim Il-sung of furnishing it with
light water nuclear reactors in order to modernize its energy needs. It will
not, however, spurn Russian aid but it will bargain as hard as it has done with
the US on the question of outstanding debt and on favorable terms for Moscow's
energy resources. It does remember feeling abandoned by [former Soviet premier
Mikhail] Gorbachev even before the collapse of the Soviet Union. Then we have
to consider that Moscow has not taken a hands-on role in the six-party talks in
Beijing. So, in order to regain Kim Jong-il's trust, it has to come up with an
aid package which speaks to North Korea's economic and political realities. The
feeling that Russia is the key exhibits a disconnect between yesterday's
historical consciousness and today's North Korea realities
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Jul 24, '08)
Saleem Shahzad, in your latest article
Plot to divide the Taliban foiled, published on July 23, 2008, you
wrote: The Taliban's resurgence in Afghanistan is viewed by global
militants as a part of the promised battles of Khurasan (ancient Khurasan
comprising mostly Afghanistan, the Pakistani tribal areas and parts of Iran),
hinted at in the Prophet Mohammad's sayings concerning the End of Time battles.
You need to check where you get your facts and history lessons from (and
perhaps your geography lessons, too). "Ancient Khorasan" does not comprise any
part of what is now Pakistan. What you could say is that "greater Khorasan"
comprises northeastern Iran along with parts of Afghanistan, Turkmenistan,
Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. The Pashtun homeland is not a part of Khorasan and
never was.
Santorini (Jul 23, '08)
The boundaries of Khorasan changed in different times. At the same time,
different nations also defined the region of Khorasan according to their own
understanding. Various Muslim academics mentioned regions, which I mentioned in
the article, as the areas meant as Khorasan in End of Time battle theories. The
al-Qaeda ideologues also defined the same region as Khorasan. Ghulam Mohammad
Ghubar, a historian from Afghanistan, talks of Proper Khorasan and Improper
Khorasan in his book titled Khorasan. According to him, Proper Khorasan
contained regions lying between Balkh (in the East), Merv (in the North),
Sijistan (in the South), Nishapur (in the West) and Herat, known as The Pearl
of Khorasan, in the center. While Improper Khorasan's boundaries extended to
Kabul and Ghazni in the East (which means the Pakistani tribal areas of North
and South Waziristan as it was old Ghazni), Sistan and Zabulistan in the South
(this means Zabul of Afghanistan, Zabul of Iran and Pakistani areas of Pashin,
Chaman, Noshki and Taftan etc) Transoxiana and Khwarezm in the North and
Damaghan and Gurgan in the West. In Memoirs of Babur, it is mentioned
that Indians called non-Hindustanis (non-Indians) as Khorasanis. Regarding the
boundary of Hindustan and Khorasan, it is written: "On the road between
Hindustan and Khorasan, there are two great marts: the one Kabul, the other
Kandahar." Thus, Improper Khorasan bordered Hindustan (old India). - Syed Saleem
Shahzad (Jul 23, '08)
Regarding Iran-US:
A study in misperceptions, [July 16, 2008], Professor Askari is
correct. His article should be required reading for all who aspire to be
foreign policy experts on Iran, especially those in the think-tanks, speakers
at conferences on Iran, and talking heads in the media (cable networks,
editorial writers and columnists). The ignorance and misperceptions about Iran
are deep and profound. Some of this has to do with the isolation that
successive US administrations have tried to impose on Iran, thereby also
isolating the US, leaving it bereft of vital knowledge. Some of it is due to
the willful disregard of facts demonizing Iran and creating a false image that
does not exist. For example, not a day goes by without the drumbeat that Iran
is an aggressor nation bent on destabilizing the Middle East, if not the world.
The question is, when is the last time in the past several centuries that Iran
attacked another nation? The resounding answer is, never, but you would not
know that reading or listening or attending conferences of the aforementioned
entities. In fact, a few weeks ago, Thomas Fingar, head of the National
Intelligence Council, said "recognizing that Iran has real security needs is a
useful starting point ... we are part of the reason why Iran feels insecure,
rightly or wrongly". A further example, the charge is that Iran, by enriching
uranium, which is its right under the NPT [Non-Proliferation Treaty], is really
embarked on a nuclear weapons program. You hear that on a daily basis. However,
there is no credible evidence to indicate that. This is the consensus reached
by 16 US national intelligence agencies in December of 2007, which in May of
2008 said they do not plan to revise. It is also what the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) said in its report of May, 2008, that after 14 unannounced
inspections in the last 13 months, the "agency has been able to continue to
verify" that Iran has not diverted any of its declared nuclear materials to
military use. The result of this dumbing down of the American people and
policies based on ignorance and outright lies, perpetuated by the Bush/Cheney
neo-con cabal is evident in the Middle East and elsewhere. The harm done is
immeasurable. This is the legacy the next leader of the United States must
grapple with and must desperately change.
Fariborz S Fatemi
Former staff member
House Foreign Affairs Committee
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
McLean, Virginia, USA (Jul 23, '08)
Peter Navarro in
China stirs over offshore oil pact [July 23] finally speaks the truth
when he writes: "A major goal of China's deep-water navy would be to protect
and defend the Strait of Malacca against a US oil embargo." It seems every
country is desperately reacting to US hegemonic behaviors around the globe. Of
course, the real tragedy here is that continued US bullying is delaying the
development of oil and gas reserves that are urgently needed by the world as
oil markets continue to tighten. Cooperative development of world reserves
would reduce pressures on the supply side of the global oil market. Thank you
for helping us see the truth, Professor Navarro.
Tang (Jul 23, '08)
[Re Bush team
turns to the dark side, July 23] I don't believe there's any need for
Julian Delasantellis to feel guilty about shorting US companies, for he never
partook in the ruination of the target business entities. The peccant souls,
rather, lie within those in charge who mucked up the economy with abandoned
flagrancy and who, I'm sure, never felt an iota of contrition for raping the
general masses.
John Chen
USA (Jul 23, '08)
[Re Militants ready
for a war without borders, July 16] Hi Syed, I read the article on the
Talibans' taming of Waziristan and peripheral regions. I have lived all my life
in India and whatever I have read is probably fed to me by Indian or Western
media. I am sure of one thing though: Pakistan is increasingly becoming an
unstable region, with bigoted and misconstrued versions of Islam completely
engulfing incremental regions of the modern day Islamic world. I find it hard
for the real Islam to find its feet. As a new Asia emerges as an economic
driver of the world economy, we will need cordial relations, especially in the
Indian sub-continent. With misguided politics this region is turning into a
minefield with jihad-fueled Pakistan taking the lead role which America is more
than happy to exploit. History has predicated that the US will stop at nothing
to fulfill its foreign policy minutes regardless to the consequences. China is
pursuing its own interests and now firmly believes that it has a broader say in
world politics and policies. India, though powerful, is too docile for its own
good, we can never count on India to take a lead role on enforcing peace in the
region, it has established itself as a softest nation on the planet. With
America losing relevance and desperately trying to fight its created demons, do
we see a solution in sight?
Sundeep Bhat
India (Jul 22, '08)
[Re Turkey in the
throes of Islamic revolution?, July 21] My answer to Spengler's
question is a resounding NO. I figure that he is either writing some sort of
propaganda piece or he has got it all wrong. I'm a foreigner who has lived in
Turkey for over 25 years, so I know enough to point out some of what is wrong.
First, he starts off mentioning 82 arrests (now it's 86 charged). Then he later
talks of "mass arrests" - why? In addition, these people seem to have been
involved in secretly backing terrorist attacks, assassinations, and coups in
Turkey. They are also being seen as Turkey's "Operation Gladio" which was
[allegedly the result of] the CIA through NATO, aided by European intelligence
agencies, setting up a network of "stay behind" secret armies in the early
1950s in case the Soviets invaded. However, later they seem to have colluded
with, funded, and often directed terrorist organizations throughout Europe (and
Turkey) with the aim of preventing the rise of the left. Today, if there are
still CIA links, then it must be the goals of the neo-cons in the US and Israel
being pursued. Given the court case against the Justice and Development Party
(AKP), the leading party, and leaders like Prime Minister [Recep Tayyip]
Erdogan, it would seem that the neo-cons aren't happy with Turkey's "zero
problems with our neighbors" foreign policy. Of course, this foreign policy is
heavily influenced by the fact that Turkey wants to be an energy corridor for
both oil and natural gas. Thus, it needs to be on good terms with all of its
possible Middle Eastern and Central Asian suppliers and with its customers -
the Europeans. This explains why it has been the AKP and Erdogan who have
worked very hard ... to join the European Union (EU). Instead, Spengler goes on
and on about "political Islam", a term concocted by the neo-cons, and the AKP's
ties to the more traditional populations in the smaller cities, towns and
villages in Turkey. Their more traditional lifestyles have been called
"Islamist", another neo-con term. He also talks about "secularists" and secular
parties - not in common usage here. It's one of those divide-and-rule
techniques, I guess. Then, Spengler mentions a neo-con, Michael Rubin, who
warns of an Islamic revolution like Iran's in Turkey. That is just crap. The
people of Turkey are very proud of the fact that their country has been founded
based on the idea of secularism - both the urbanized and the more traditional
citizens. As for his description of the villagers in Turkey being like Saudi
Arabians, I can only say - what nonsense is that? The same goes for the idea
that "Saudi Arabia looms larger in the Turkish economy" - oh, come on! It is
the EU that Turkey trades the most with by far. The Turkish economy is being
hit by the high oil and food prices which could hurt the AKP whose popularity
stems from the way they created a climate for the creation and growth of many
small and mid-sized businesses. Of course, some of the AKP's neo-liberal
policies (which are the real reason the US has backed them) are now starting to
pinch. Naturally, the so-called secularists, some of whom are said to be social
democrats, present no coherent arguments that explain the problems with those
neo-liberal policies, nor do they offer any alternative social democratic
policies. Actually, some say the current tense situation in Turkey is based on
a new group of elites on the rise who are leaving the old elites behind, but
I'd say that the most recent problems are related to the neo-cons putting the
screws on Turkey. Related to Turkey's secularism, there do seem to be different
ideas about it. Some do see it related to dress. Most see it elated to the
separation of "church" and state and wish for more separation. Some want the
government to interfere less in religion related issues. However, no one
is talking about getting rid of secularism in Turkey just as no one is
discussing bringing in sharia law. Then, Spengler focuses on ethnic and
confessional divides - another way to destabilize a country if that is your
goal. In fact, it is Turkey's secularism that enables such potential points of
conflict to remain minor except for the Kurdish situation which the AKP has
socio-economically worked hard to deal with - gaining them a lot of Kurdish
votes in the last election. Of course, there have been attacks viewed as
Kurdistan Workers' Party attacks and then military responses, responses I
personally find disturbing. However, it now seems that some of those attacks
could be related to the people arrested or some even more powerful people still
working behind the scenes. Finally, if you do want to talk about religion in
Turkey, you'll find that the emphasis for a long time has been on how one deals
with modernity while following one's beliefs. In general, Muslims do not have
problems with science and technology - a subject people like Fethullah Gulen
focus on. Gulen has also always expressed the need for moderation and tolerance
as guiding principles. That Rubin and Spengler refer to him as "Turkey's answer
to Khomeini" is just another ridiculous idea. No matter what happens in Turkey,
there is little or no chance of it becoming the "Islamic Republic of Turkey".
Marie K
Turkey (Jul 22, '08)
Regarding A leap
of faith for Saudi King, July 21, I think it's a noble idea, but very
impractical. Hinduism has a lot of in common with Buddhism but these two faiths
are very different from Abrahamic faiths. Abrahamic faiths are autocratic (God
insists his is the only way, you disagree and you go to Hell); Hinduism is a
democratic faith (There are several ways to reach God, there is no such thing
as Hell). This is the reason why Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India took such
divergent paths after independence.They view God as a king or master making
them subjects or servants, we view God as a parent or teacher. They talk about
being born in sin, whereas we believe that a divine spark exists in all of us.
The Muslim kneels when he prays, a Hindu should never kneel before God. They
have but one life, whereas a Hindu is born many times. They segregate their
heavens, whereas Rama's heaven is open to all good souls, even atheists. Mother
Teresa may have no room in her heaven for us, but we will welcome her into ours
any day. If the Buddha had been born in Europe in the Middle Ages he would have
been tortured and killed, and there would be no Buddhism today! How can a
dialogue be possible when the teachings differ so much? This is like communists
and democrats getting together to find common ground! Some things are simply
not possible.
Jayant Patel
India (Jul 22, '08)
[Re China's basketball
mission not impossible, July 19] As much as the Chinese Olympic
basketball team has improved over the recent years, its chances of upsetting
the US squad range from slim to none. Sure, Team China boasts a formidable
starting front line of Yao Ming, Yi Jianlian, and Wang Zhizhi, but its
backcourt and overall depth are sorely lacking. Using roughhousing tactics to
unsettle the US team? I doubt it. For one thing, Yao is a finesse player whose
style few, if any, experts have ever confused with that of the burly Shaq, and
he is coming off a major foot surgery. In my opinion, any chance of an upset
would actually come from US players' unfamiliarity with international rules.
Other than that, Dream Team should have a relatively easy time in this match.
As for Team China, given the level of competition, it would be a tremendous
accomplishment if somehow it could find a way into the semi-final round. On a
separate note, M K Bhadrakumar's latest report
Russia's energy drive leaves US reeling [July 19] reminds one of the
maxim quod severis etes [As ye sow, so shall ye reap]. The US, through a
slew of myopic foreign policy initiatives over the past eight years, has been
the single biggest abettor to Russia’s spectacular renascence. As Mr
Bhadrakumar put it, "Washington has only itself to blame" for being
increasingly boxed-in in the world energy game.
John Chen
USA (Jul 21, '08)
I think we will need to wait a bit longer before it becomes possible to declare
Russia a clear winner in Iran [Russia's
energy drive leaves US reeling, July 19]. As the recent developments in
the US-Iran relationship show, the US, up until now, has been playing the role
of the "bad cop" in the international arena and has successfully isolated Iran
from the majority of the OECD [Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development] countries. The most glaring recent example of this is the French
oil company Total withdrawing from the development of Iran's South Pars gas
field, and both France and the UK running down their trade ties with Iran, with
Germany and Italy soon to follow. International sanctions, the financial
restrictions in particular, imposed by America, have succeeded in deterring
business with Iran and forced banks in the European Union countries to cut down
or halt dealings with Iran. So what is a better time to metamorphose into the
role of a "good cop" than now? With the field now wide open, it is the time [to
give] US business in general and oil companies in particular free competition
in Iran. If Israel ever thought that America would sacrifice its future control
over energy security, now is the time for them to get wise. The only cloud on
the horizon is Iran's trade relations moving from the US and Europe towards
China, the United Arab Emirates and now Russia. Did America wait a bit too long
to reverse its role vis-a-vis Iran? We can only wait and see.
TutuG
Scotland (Jul 21, '08)
An elusive new face for
North Korea [July 19] raises intriguing questions. They require further
clarification. Any comparison with why the US threatened cutting aid to South
Korea after Park Chung-hee overthrew the government of John Chang, is frankly
beside the point and ahistorical. The Bush administration experience in pushing
Pyongyang to the wall resulted, if anyone forgot, in the testing of an atomic
device, and that brought Washington back pronto to the negotiating table. Tying
human rights to economic aid will have the effect of an elephant's lazy tail
swatting a pesky fly. As for economic reform, the Lee Myung-bak government's
withholding any aid and contact with Kim Jong-il's regime has not stopped the
slow but discernible economic reforms in North Korea. Talks with foreign
diplomats and NGO personnel living in Pyongyang and traveling within North
Korea bear this out, as well as the writings of Dr Rudiger Frank of Vienna, who
as early as the late 1990s detected the first, tentative steps of market
reform. Kim Jong-il, it is said, is soon going to visit Vietnam. There, he will
discuss and see the results of doi moi. (It is useful to recall that he
has already visited market reformed areas in China). Saying this, however, it
is useful to recall that North Korea has its own style. Any reforms that
Pyongyang carries out, any useful examples of change in market mechanisms
observed from abroad, [will] have a "made in the DPRK" stamp on them. North
Korea's fierce nationalism will not allow anything else short of being sui
generis [of its own kind] in theory and practice. The proof of the
pudding is open and constant contact with Pyongyang, so as to have a finger on
the pulse of the country.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Jul 21, '08)
[Re A war waiting
to happen, July 16] Empires, it would seem, like jugs, go to the well
until they break. Iraq, Afghanistan, and possibly Iran are not enough -
Washington seems to want a little war in the Caucasus as well, just to keep its
hand in. Dreams of world domination die hard, even when things are collapsing
on the domestic front ...
M Henri Day, PhD, MD
Stockholm (Jul 18, '08)
Sami Moubayed's Hezbollah's
deal leaves Israel short [July 18] compares olives to dates. It is a
matter of how you look at the question at hand. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud
Olmert and President Shimon Peres speak of uplifting Israeli morale in
reclaiming the remains of Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, protests
notwithstanding. For Israel, a Jew alive or dead sustains the racial
underpinnings of the Zionist state, and his final resting place is in what the
Zionist call "eretz Israel" [earth or land of Israel]. Thus, in this sense, and
this sense alone, the deal has not left Israel short. As Mr Olmert suggests,
Israel has a debt to its fighting sons and daughters, and in the exchange of
Arab prisoners, it has fulfilled its duty. Moreover, the 199 to 2 exchange
misreads the weight an Israeli life means, and underscores the Israeli sense of
racial pride or prejudice, depending how you interpret the deal with Hezbollah.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Jul 18, '08)
[Re The next
big wave is breaking, July 17] Once again, Asia Times Online brings us
the facts that Wall Street and the US government try to conceal. Because they
are scared spitless by the mess they have produced, both Wall Street and the US
don't know how to fix it, and don't know how to admit their errors. The same
thing holds true here in South Dakota where our state government followed the
herd of Wall Street wiseguys and exposed state investment funds to losses from
the credit securitization fiasco. Now, in an election year, they don't want the
facts exposed.
Tom Gerber
USA (Jul 17, '08)
[Re High-end tourists
tame Taiwan's fears, July 17]. A decade or two ago, the Hong Kong
residents were similarly apprehensive about the mainland Chinese and used names
like Ah Tcan, a term of endearment less endearing than country bumpkin,
to sneer at fresh-off-the-boat immigrants from Guangdong province. [See also
Hong Kong's dirty little secret: Racism, by Kent Ewing, July 15].
Today, the former British colony is practically begging mainlanders to spend
their new-found wealth in the territory (a reversal of fortune that will become
even more acute and more poignant once direct links between China and Taiwan
are more firmly established). While Taiwan undoubtedly does not wish to kowtow
to Beijing, the island will perforce truckle to the demands of economic and
geopolitical realities. The naked truth is that Taiwan's future well-being is
heavily dependent on the maintenance of amicable relations across the strait.
John Chen USA (Jul 17, '08)
Shawn Crispin's
Thailand's conflict gets economic [July 12] is a good write-up, as
usual. I am probably a bit more pessimistic regarding divisiveness here and who
has the country's best interests at heart. All sides have been giving lip
service but individually doing what behooves each personally. I would have one
hope for Thailand: that the PAD [People's Alliance for Democracy], given its
faults, of which there are many, proves to be a wedge driven into the Thai
collective consciousness that forces a permanent divisiveness somewhat along
the lines you see in some other Western countries where people respect each
others' viewpoints but fight for their own. To date Thais have really not been
prepared to take this important step. The degree of unity-mindedness here
places a huge obstacle in the way of social development.
Frank Anderson
Korat, Thailand (Jul 16, '08)
[Re Jaws close
in on Bernanke, July 16, and
Financial collapse edges closer, July 16]. The Fed’s clumsy effort to
stave off financial market meltdown rather feels like a feeble attempt to stop
a free-falling guillotine with a strand of hair - too little, too late. Two
thousand points ago, stabilization of the Dow around 9,500 seemed like a
reasonable guesstimate. With the way events are unfolding, investors should
gather 'round and join hands for a hearty rendition of "Kumbaya" if the index's
slide could be arrested at the 8,500-point level. In the brief span of one
decade, we've gone from the best of times to the worst of times, from an age of
exuberance to an age of doom, as in "We're freaking doomed!"
John Chen
USA (Jul 16, '08)
Mr Hutchinson ends
Financial collapse edges closer [July 16] with "... a total collapse of
the US financial system ... is a contingency which should now be planned for".
One way of planning for it is to consider abandoning capitalism in favor of a
more rational, humane alternative. Although such a transition is suggested by
the economic crises Mr Hutchinson himself describes, he does not mention it as
a possibility. Why not?
Ira Sohn (Jul 16, '08)
Professor Hossein Askari's
Iran-US: A study in misperceptions [July 16] makes eminently good
sense. It would make a fine lecture at a university. Yet, it is besides the
point. [US] President Bush's policy towards Iran is ideologically colored and
motivated. It is tinged with a will to bend Tehran to his will and to erase the
dishonor of the occupation of the American embassy and the humiliation of
American hostages. It has not met with any reasonable measure of success, and
Mr Bush's warlike rhetoric has simply pushed the envelope to extremes.
Nonetheless the war of words is just that - a super-heated exchange of menaces
and threats. The American president is in no way, shape, or form able to put
his thunderbolts of war to good use. Iran knows this, and is willing to play Mr
Bush's game of chicken. Professor Askari tends to forget that competent
advisers, diplomats, generals, and fluent speakers of Farsi [Persian] work for
and are at the command of Mr Bush. He has mapped out a strategy which as far as
we know, has paid scant attention to their advice.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Jul 16, '08)
As Mr Engdahl points out in
A war waiting to happen [July 16], the risks associated with the
current US policy of brinkmanship with Russia in the Caucasus are enormous,
even grave. The chances are very slim for a US "win" over Russia in this very
dangerous game, that is, a win that would actually be something more than a
mere Pyrrhic victory that leaves the fragile US economy and overstretched
military in complete shambles. In the light of such stubborn facts, the
continued implementation of the current US policy is entirely irrational. I've
asked myself what could possibly drive such distinctly irrational behavior on
the part of the Bush administration, and I can come up with only one answer -
the radical, even fanatical fundamentalist "Christian" religion its key members
are widely known to be devotees of. This would explain much. Mr Bush and his
sycophant advisors and cabinet members obviously think and reason with their
irrational religious-political-ideological passions, not with their intellect.
... Only the irrationality of radical fundamentalist religious "faith" (the
"burning bosom" syndrome) can adequately explain the phenomenon of the Bush
administration's stubborn pursuit of an entirely absurd foreign policy. While
other factors (such as political ideology and greed) certainly enter the mix,
their profoundly reckless "faith" occupies the core of their motivation and
thinking. I'm having increasing difficulty mounting any sound argument against
those who say this administration and the Bin Ladens of the radical Islamic
world are merely flip sides of the same frightening coin. Heaven (the real
heaven, not their concocted radical one) help us.
W Joseph Stroupe (Jul 16, '08)
[Re China's
veto just part of business, July 15] Interesting that Mr Navarro labels
China as retaining an "imperialistic strategy" and "an amoral foreign policy",
especially considering that he is writing from a country [the US] that over the
past century has taken natural resources from nations around the world by
staging coups, revolutions, violent meddling tactics and outright military
invasions and occupations. At least the Chinese deploy their means of securing
vital national interests abroad through "soft power" tactics that win over the
leaderships and populations of those they wish to "exploit". One hopes that, by
utilizing a genuinely African-American president, America will rely on similar
"soft" means of diplomacy and relationship building in competing with China for
African (and Southwest Asian?) loyalties and resource sharing. Yet considering
that Mr [Barack] Obama's imminent tenure would be accompanied by the "hard
stick" of the Pentagon's AFRICOM unit, that may prove highly unlikely, let
alone typical of US foreign policy.
R Davoodi
Tehran (Jul 15, '08)
I do not know if it is absolutely mockingly outrageous or hilarious reading
Peter Navarro's Re
China's veto just part of business [ July 15] accusing communist China
of Western-style imperialism. Peter, why don't you bother to read from your
history first? In 1898, the United States officially became a great power by
winning against Spain in the Spanish-American War. The pretext of the war, of
course, was to win independence for the Cubans against Spanish rule. In the
process, Cuba did become nominally independent but only at the expense of
becoming a virtual protectorate of America. For the next 60 years, Cuba will
become a virtual sugar plantation for America and a Las Vegas-style playground
for the mafia. And may I remind Peter, that as a Filipino I study my history
only too well - America launched a three-year war of occupation against the
Filipino "insurrectionists" in the name of imposing American-style democracy.
President [William] McKinley, of course, justified it in the name of converting
Filipinos to Christianity. McKinley realized the Philippines' geostrategic
proximity to China and the United States did not want to be left out by other
European powers in plundering China's wealth. China's current policy, if it is
considered imperialism, is at least benign compared to past British, American
or Soviet imperialism in the sense that China not only takes a country's wealth
but also builds decent infrastructure and gives preferential loans with no
political strings attached. At least they don't preach communism (they
abandoned that policy in the 1970s) or dictate to sovereign governments on what
their system of government should be, and invade a country on the pretext of
humanitarian democracy when they want to plunder a country's wealth. You accuse
China of selling weapons to Sudan and Zimbabwe. Your government has sold arms
and fighter jets to Egypt and Saudi Arabia. They are not exactly paragons of
democracy and human rights. In fact, the Saudis sponsored Wahabbi terrorism
before 9/11, and they regularly whip to death "unchaste" women.
Jake Bantug
Cebu, Philippines (Jul 15, '08)
Tom Engelhardt's Five
weddings and many funerals [July 15] is a nice piece. Thank you, Tom.
Also, your Why the
US won't attack Iran [July 11] deserves applause. Many people are
suffering for the US's mistakes in Iraq and elsewhere. In today's world, I am
afraid nobody except those who profit from high oil price and arms sales are
happy. Many writers still focus on the "rights situation" in China and are
expecting bad news from the Olympic Games. They simply don't care that every
day many people in Iraq and Afghanistan are dying quietly.
Giant Panda
Chengdu, China (Jul 15, '08)
Sami Moubayed has the story right in
Syria basks in diplomatic breakthrough [July 15]. Syria is enjoying its
place in the sun diplomatically speaking, as it should be. Re-establishment of
diplomatic relations with Lebanon confirms the shift in the balance of
confessional alliances in Beirut. Back-channel talks with Israel in Turkey
lowers pressure on Israel's northern borders, and let's say it, is allowing
Prime Minister [Ehud] Olmert, under the heavy cloud of corruption, to remain in
office. Yet it cannot be denied that France has also re-entered a traditional
role in the Middle East, acting as the honest broker since US President George
W Bush has poorly played America's diplomatic cards. When all is said and done,
however, nary a mention of the 10-tonne guerrilla in the wings which casts a
long shadow on Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Israel and the Persian Gulf; I am speaking
of Iran. Although Paris' Sommet de Paris pour la Mediterranee in session
now excludes the presence of Tehran, Iran is a silent partner in any agreement
for stability and peace in the Middle East, and it is the minds of the
diplomats who are re-arranging the musical chairs to settle old and newer
quarrels.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Jul 15, '08)
Regarding Hong Kong's
dirty little secret: Racism by Kent Ewing on July 15: Hong Kong was
built upon racism! If Hong Kong had really lived up to the spirit of
anti-racial discrimination 40 years ago, its entire government would have had
to be dismantled. I believe many had expected the exodus of the non-Chinese as
1997 approached. Perhaps it is only recently evident that the European and
Indian populations in Hong Kong have the intention to be a permanent part of
Hong Kong society, in learning the language and in adapting to the way of life.
Is 11 years after colonialism a very long time? I think discrimination against
persons from the Chinese mainland is not racism, as the title suggests; not
every form of bias is racism. Precisely for Hong Kong, since it has a high
degree of class mobility through education and meritocracy, bias from region of
origin is finite, even though significant, and transient, one-generation.
Perhaps this fact is salient to the present generation of mainlanders, who have
high hopes for their children's future. I think mainlanders are not
"untouchables". Also, individuals act to reduce regional bias; [former US
president] Bill Clinton molded himself in speech: his Southern drawl is
reserved for fellow Southerners. Public policy against true racial
discrimination, and for assimilation across the racial divide, is far more
complex and has to be supported by the government with strong political will
and adaptability. Ewing writes, "it [1996 EOC] has been predictably ineffectual
because of the lack of any legal framework that would have given it teeth". The
US has its teeth; the one with the strongest bite is forced busing of children
to compel exposure. Busing is highly intrusive and elaborate; it is
anti-freedom, that of association of persons, to promote freedom, namely
assimilation; such is governmental adaptability. Regardless of how any group
has arrived at the US and what its experience has been, lynching of blacks
notwithstanding, exposure must be imposed. I tend to think that the
intrusiveness in busing dwarfs any government-assisted population migration to
dilute minority cultures, as allegedly Hans into the Tibetan region. The
difference is in spending an extra hour on a bus in order to sit next to a
different kind of person eight hours a day versus having a different kind of
neighbor.
Jeff Church
USA (Jul 15, '08)
Excellent piece of incisive intelligence by Saleem Shahzad in
Afghanistan's 'sons of the soil' rise up, July 12. I may, however, say
that Pakistan's intelligence men may not be mentally so resilient [or] take
pains in such depth as he does. What is more worrisome is the Indian factor
whose designs ... are dangerous for the region! They will play Israel in this
region as [Israel] does in the Middle East for the US, the West and neo-cons.
...
Wariss Shaw
Jhang, Pakistan (Jul 14, '08)
Dear Saleem, I feel encouraged to sift through the article you have written on
the latest civilized Talibanization. In fact, this is [the] need of the hour
and a panacea for [the] whole of this region. But it is not easily digestible
for the Western powers unless they see their gains and find a tilt towards
them. Here would come the diplomacy which has to be adopted by Pakistani
rulers, unfortunately a rare commodity at present. Please write more on how the
Pakistani authorities, vis a vis [ministries of] foreign affairs, interior,
defense and local government should carve a way forward for themselves. That
will not only help the idiots up there but also would be informative for more
worried ones, like me. Do give me a response. I am a retired technocrat and
want to see this beautiful land of ours prosper before my eyes are closed. Best
regards and once again "well done" for your effort.
Sohail (Jul 14, '08)
In the coming days the Afghan war theater will be so hot that the heat will
eventually cross the Atlantic Ocean. Sending more troops is no answer to the
problem at this stage. The former USSR, with most troops coming from Central
Asian Muslim states, and several times more troops than the [current] NATO
force and with powerful leadership of the local Afghan communists, failed to
contain the resistance. [Therefore] how can Western armies. with no local
leadership ... available, ever be able to contain the present situation? The
dialogue process with the Taliban is the ultimate solution. For face-saving
purposes, they can invent the concept of a moderate, non-radical Taliban with
the help of Pakistan.
Syed Saleem Shahzad (Jul 14, '08)
The tragic fatal shooting of Miss Park Wang-ja in a fenced off military area
near the North Korean tourist enclave, Kumgangsan, which caters to South
Koreans, is to be deplored. It comes at an awkward moment in relations with the
South; there, President Lee Myung-bak forced by a groundswell of public
opinion, had offered to resume talks with the North; owing to Miss Park's
death, his extended hand is temporarily withdrawn. It has caused some unease at
the resumed six-party talks in Beijing where verification of North Korea's
accounting of its nuclear activities is being discussed under the lens of a
high-powered looking glass. Nonetheless, as Donald Kirk writes in
Flash of temper livens Korea talks [July 12], the dust-up of North
Korean guards at the Demilitarized Zone may have something to do with the
regrettable incident at Kumgangsan, but then again it might not. Miss Park is
indeed a victim, yet her killing will not put South Korean and US troops on
code red alert; it does not fully explain the guards' bad behavior. Perhaps no
one will ever know the real reason. Surely the clock has not been turned back
to the days of ready fingers on triggers at the time of the infamous tree
cutting incident in the mid-1970s.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Jul 14, '08)
[Re Pepe Escobar's
Iran's missiles are just for show, July 11] It is always refreshing to
read through the various columns contained in your fine publication. While most
Western media outlets like to say they cover the political spectrum from
liberal to conservative, it is truly only on your website that I can find
editorials from the likes of Pashto/Taliban sympathizers and Christian war
gamers. The insights and viewpoints I find here show how frequently we in the
West are being spoon-fed select tidbits of information - for that alone I
applaud the work of your authors and urge them to keep up their fight. Every
once in a while, though, as with most people in the world, there is a tendency
to push the envelope of unbiased reporting and insert personal beliefs or
feelings into what should be factually based reportage. When it comes to the
recent Iranian missile tests, Pepe Escobar seems to have let his animosity
towards the current American regime color his otherwise truthful reporting. The
Iranian missile test did not go off "without a hitch", nor did they manage to
simultaneously fire a set of 4 Shahab-3s. The doctored footage of the missile
firing is readily available online, and in fact is the subject of an editorial
dealing with poor "photo-shopping" techniques, as well as the topic of a number
of editorials regarding the need for Iran to attempt such a clumsy and awkward
job. One example can be found here -
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/in-an-iranian-image-a-missile-too-many/
It makes the great Salami's comments about "hands being on triggers, always
ready to fire" a little more humorous. Adding to the "just for decoration"
aspect, the other missiles tested included the Zelzal, versions of which have a
range of 130-185 miles, and the Fateh, with a range of 105 miles. I am sure the
Turks and the Israelis are shivering with fear at the potential. While all too
eager to blast away at a US government that lies and misleads its populace into
a war, there seems to be a reluctance to take on the Iranian deceit (or the
Pashto deceit, or the Pakistani, or the Saudi, or ... well, the point is
well-made). Tsk, tsk Monsieur Escobar - an unbiased approach is the paradigm of
journalism. Please, do not lower your standards in this way - if you need a
fuller understanding of Iran and the delicate situation there, your fellow
columnist Spengler is well-positioned to clarify your misunderstandings. There
is one thing that Pepe gets right - the dispersal of troops and the attempt to
mesh what are considered "elite" forces by a Middle Eastern government with
what are considered "regular" forces in order to combat an anticipated American
invasion was attempted before. I don't know if the Iraqi Army would concur with
his projections for success, but then again, if there is one thing that
everyone has been unable to properly predict, it is how long a Middle Eastern
force could resist an American invasion.
Patrick Kennedy
Ottawa, Canada (Jul 14, '08)
In regards to Hardy Campbell's letter about my letter concerning Mr Rigg's
article A last
throw of the dice? [July 10], I believe Mr Campbell missed the whole
point of my letter. My point was the Islamic Republic of Iran has been engaged
in a war with the US since the first day of its existence. Starting with the
act of war of the seizure of the US embassy and imprisonment of the diplomatic
staff for 444 days. Mr Campbell claims that the civil rights legislation
"miraculously appeared 100 years after the Civil War" because Black Americans
decided to "burn down whitey's building". The riots in American inner cities
took place mostly from 1965-68 caused primarily by brutal police departments
that were primarily all white. The movement to improve civil rights in America
can be dated from President Truman's decision to desegregate the US military in
1947. This was followed by a series of other major events including, Brown
versus Board of Education (1954), the Little Rock Nine (1957), the
desegregation of the University of Alabama (1963), the Civil Rights Act of 1964
and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. All these were in place before the Watts
Riot in August of 1965. Some of these acts included US Federal troops enforcing
these rights with the point of a gun. President Johnson, when he signed the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, said it would cost the Democratic Party the loss of
the South for a generation. As for Iran's intentions, their desire is the
spreading of Shi'ite influence throughout the Islamic world. The Iranian
creation Hezbollah has in effect taken over the government of Lebanon in all
but name. They started a war with Israel last summer with their surprise attack
on a group of Israeli soldiers. That war has had very negative effects on the
State of Lebanon but has allowed Hezbollah to increase its power. As for
"propping up the evil Saudi's" we sell them weapons, if we did not, they would
buy them from the Europeans, Russians or Chinese. For the United States being a
paper tiger if you read my previous letter I explode that fallacy. As to the
nature of the Iranian regime they do not allow a free press and exclude over
90% of reformers from running for political office. They have marauded over
Europe killing their opponents. There is also the case of Zahra Kazemi who was
raped, tortured and murdered by Iranian state. Does Mr Campbell believe Iran
has the moral right to kill Americans at will, and what rights does he grant
the US in the form of self-defense?
Dennis O'Connell
USA (Jul 14, '08)
[Re US caught in wrangle
over envoy, July 11] Why is Hahm Chaibong skittish in withholding the
name of the one senator who is holding up Kathleen Stephens' nomination as US
ambassadrix to the Republic of Korea? If he won't, I shall. It's the Republican
senator from Ohio, George Voinovich. He took unkindly, it seems, to Ambassador
Stephens during her confirmation hearing when he asked her to comment on North
Korea's human rights record. Stephens coldly replied that she was going to be
ambassador to South Korea, not North Korea. Her sharp reply so nettled
Voinovich that he vowed not to approve her appointment. Yet, there is more than
meets the eye here. Let's not forget that a tearful Voinovich torpedoed John
Bolton's appointment as US ambassador to the United Nations, thereby alienating
the neo-conservative wing of his party.Yet, his pique notwithstanding in his
opposition to Stephens' nomination, he is buying back his conservative
credentials with the backing of Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas who has long
beaten the drum on human rights in North Korea and has encouraged faith-based
groups not only to proselytize North Korean refugees and only to aid them in
finding asylum in South Korea but to oppose any meaningful contact with
Pyongyang. Stephens therefore is a surrogate for hard-nosed Republicans who are
very unhappy with President Bush's reversal in his dealings with Kim Jong-Il's
regime. The White House, according to Chosun Ilbo, will neither pressure
Voinovich to change his mind nor is it willing to pick a fight with Brownback.
It feels that it is not worth the political intra-Republican party squabble and
fall out in an election year. So as very qualified as Stephens is, and Hahm
calls her a truly qualified candidate and fluent in Korean, it looks as though
she won't be presenting her credentials to President Lee Myung-bak at the Blue
House any time soon.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Jul 11, '08)
Chietigj Bajpaee's comment, headlined
Delhi carries a small stick [July 9] suggests that India's foreign
policy should be both assertive as well as aggressive. Does aggressive mean
sending armed troops to the neighboring countries to bring them under control?
Would it be wise for Delhi to send "peacekeeping forces" to Afghanistan as it
did in Sri Lanka? ... Indian authorities should pay attention to the
commentator's following observation: "No country in history has risen to great
power status with instability on all of its borders and active insurgencies in
over half of its states (Naxalite, northeast, Kashmir)."
Zoya Anderson
Perth, Australia (Jul 11, '08)
Wish I could have been as sanguine as Tom Engelhardt (Why
the US won't attack Iran, July 11). My reading of Seymour Hersh, [is]
that Dick Cheney is all gung-ho about the US attacking Iran. This is because
the history of foreign invasions by America has taught the administration that
it is starting the war which is important. For, once the US troops are deployed
overseas, no future administration would dare to bring them back home. We all
should be very, very afraid before the current administration leaves the White
House.
Tutu G
Scotland (Jul 11, '08)
[Re Why the US
won't attack Iran, July 11]. For the past many months, I have been
asked several times what I thought the possibility was (is) of the US and/or
its Middle East satrapy, Israel, attacking Iran. In all cases, I have replied
(in other words), precisely as Tom put it at the tail end of this article: "And
yet, of course, for the maddest gamblers and dystopian dreamers in our history,
never say never". The world is truly dealing with a covey of madmen here.
Keith Leal
Pincher Creek, Canada (Jul 11, '08)
[Re Spengler's America's
special grace, July 8] I admire Spengler's description of the American
Idea as coming, most fundamentally, from the notion of special grace. Whatever
divine entitlements the Jews and other peoples enjoy, they were a gift.
America's distinction was in the declaration of their endowments by the Creator
as a right. About his fretful criticism of Obama's observation on traditional
societies, Spengler's logic is labored to exhaustion. I had to re-read it a
couple of times in an attempt to extract some rightful complaint. There was
none. Spengler's hypothesis seems to be that civil order engenders tyranny;
where chaos thrives, so does liberty. Nowhere did Obama draw the conclusion
that coherence cannot have a father called Freedom. That Spengler did draw that
conclusion, is to ally with Freedom's bastard, anarchy.
Mak
Los Angeles (Jul 11, '08)
Does Jeff Church (commenting on
America's special grace, letter, July 9) realize that the
discrimination that he is advocating is illegal? He lives in the US, so
obviously he has come across words like "one cannot discriminate on the basis
of sex, race, religion". So, the few Jews who converted to Christianity around
Hitler's time did the right thing? What kind of a person advocates Hitler-like
views? They say that America is the melting pot, well guess who it is putting
the heat on. Whereas India is called a salad bowl. The multiplicity of
languages, religions, cuisine, culture, is mind-boggling. Maybe that's why I
don't see why I should discriminate against someone because he is of a
different culture. Maybe I should befriend him as I might learn something new.
The richest man in India is a Muslim, the Tatas, who recently bought Jaguar
from Britain, are [Parsi]. A Sikh is the prime minister and an [Italy-born
woman] is the [president of the Congress Party]! And we are glad that the Dalai
Lama calls India his home away from home! Only in India, only in a salad bowl!
Jayant Patel (Jul 11, '08)
When I contrast Mr O'Connell's missive with Mr Raskatin's (letters, July 10) I
find myself unable to endorse any of my fellow countryman's tired, hackneyed
aphorisms about mad mullahs but in complete endorsement with the Russian
perspective. This should be a difficult thing for me, as a US citizen to do,
since it is tantamount to condemning my own country. Alas, in my misbegotten
youth as a conservative Texan who supported fighting godless communists and
free-loving hippies, I was O'Connell - eager to swallow every load of
bovine feces spoon-fed to me and my fellow myth-believers by the entrenched
oligarchs of politics and industry. But one day, when adolescence and the
predilection to respect and cower before authority waned, my eyes opened and
my, as Mr Raskatin says, was it ugly. Everything I read and thought about
seemed to turn the world topsy-turvy. The war in Vietnam wasn't about
containing communists, it was about hegemony and domination. Civil rights
legislation miraculously appeared 100 years after the Civil War ended, not out
of any white guilt for ignoring its own hollow mottos about freedom and
equality, but because a burning building gets whitey's attention mighty fast.
Watergate was the logical culmination of decades of congressional cession of
power to a corrupt White House, regardless of who was in it. Indeed, George W
Bush was the natural evolutionary product of this disintegration of America, a
creature utterly contemptuous of everything this country has ever stood for (in
theory at least), hiding behind his peace-loving God while raining death and
misery everywhere. So, while O'Connell wrings his hands about the Hobson's
choices facing a paper tiger superpower, Raskatin rightly asserts that any
concern about America's diminution of moral authority is unfounded. O'Connell
frets because America is threatened by any nation willing to defend itself, and
a nuke sure makes that easy to do (consult Kim Jong-Il's website
www.AxisofEvilandPlutoniumEmporium.boom.) And that is why I endorse and support
Iran's quest for Weapons of Muslim Defense (my version of WMD). Indeed, one
could argue that a failure to develop this capability, in light of Bush's
obvious psychosis, would be grounds for treason. The illusion that the United
States has any moral suasion left in its rapidly atrophying arsenal of
influence is, as they say here in Texas, a dog that won't hunt. It is not Iran
that has invaded a sovereign nation with flimsy excuses. It is not Iran that is
establishing permanent bases of neo-colonial occupation in Iraq. It is not Iran
that has caused the deaths of thousands of Iraqis by their unprovoked war. It
is not Iran that has shredded its own constitution. It is not Iran that is
propping up despotic rulers in Saudi Arabia. It is not Iranian private
contractors that are profiting from a criminal and illegal war. By any moral
gauge, Iran scores far, far ahead of the US, which consistently applies a
double standard in its bid for global supremacy; the noble gospel of freedom,
liberty and human rights it expects the world to aspire to, and the oppressive,
decadent and corrosive goals it actively pursues. O'Connell is entirely correct
in his fear for the future. However, it is not Iran that should be the source
of his concern, but the right hand of a vengeful God.
Hardy Campbell
Houston, Texas (Jul 11, '08)
If it does occur, A
last throw of the dice ...? [July 10], it would bring to an end the
roots established by "A Clean Break. A New Strategy for Securing the Realm"
[report, 1996] prepared by principally Richard Perle and several neo-cons at
the behest of Benjamin Netanyahu, the then-prime minister of Israel, and
adapted by neo-cons both in Israel and in the US into the "Project for a New
American Century". The plans, strategies as well as the projects proposed were
adopted by the Bush administration and used in an "in your face" disregard for
international as well as institutional considerations. Thereby providing Mr
Rigg with the appropriate title for his overview. And brings to mind one of
Mohandas Gandhi's least-quoted adages which if memory serves right goes, "First
they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." We
certainly are living in interesting times to say the least.
Armand De laurell (Jul 10, '08)
Contrary to what Bob Rigg writes in
A last throw of the dice ...? [July 10] the US does not have more
troops in Afghanistan than Iraq. The numbers are 145,000 in Iraq versus 27,000
in Afghanistan with the recent addition of 3,200 more soldiers. Mr Rigg
believes the US is the root of all evil in the Middle East. However, since 1979
Iran is responsible for the death of hundreds of Americans including attacks on
the US embassy and marine barracks in Lebanon. Also the bombing of the Khobar
Towers in Saudi Arabia and Iranian aid to Iraqi insurgents mostly in the form
of IEDs [improvised explosive devices] which are the cause of most US deaths.
Most experts who are not complete Marxist dupes believe Iran is intent on
acquiring nuclear weapons. My question is, if Iran has behaved this
aggressively while it is essentially defenseless, how will it behave when it
gets nuclear weapons and believes it has an impenetrable defense? I for one
don't want to find out. Attacking Iran will be a disaster on many levels;
however, allowing Iran to get nuclear weapons will be the larger tragedy. With
the disastrous US foreign policies of the last 30 years the US is left choosing
between the horrific and the horrendous. There are no good options left to the
US because of our failures of the past. Let's hope the same will not be said
about Iran in the future.
Dennis O'Connell
USA (Jul 10, '08)
[Re A last throw
of the dice ...?, July 10] I have to admit that I didn't read the whole
article. Every time someone tells me that America runs a risk of losing moral
authority, I just tune off. The US simply can't have any moral authority to
begin with, period. It's a country that was established by way of the world's
biggest genocide, with 95% of natives slaughtered or pushed into oblivion, at
times with the help of the first known use of biological weapons
(plague-infected blankets). It got fat on the back of black slaves, with
de-facto slavery being practiced up to World War II (according to Slavery by
another name by Douglas Blackmon). In a little more than 200 years it
has had more wars than most countries managed to have in thousands of years.
It's the only country that nuked a civilian population. It supported the
world's most vile dictators, while keeping true freedom-fighters like Nelson
Mandela on its terrorist list. It has more people locked up in prisons than
China and Russia combined. What moral authority is there? Sure it does talk
good talk today, but everybody who cares to know knows that America uses "human
rights" as a political tool to bludgeon its adversaries. Who are we trying to
fool? The mask is off, and there is no way of hiding America's ugly face ever
again. And, oh man, it's ugly ...
Raskatin
Russia (Jul 10, '08)
[Re China
succor for foreign lenders, July 10] Cash-rich China is a godsend for
foreign banks. As Olivia Chung writes, not only does the presence of US,
British, and other overseas investment banks see China's black ink at the
bottom of quarterly or interim or annual balance sheets, but China is a
Shangri-la of sorts for asset management. China's untapped private wealth
offers endless opportunities for investment and goodly fees, which make every
investment banker's mouth water. Yet, the pinch of regulation is never distant
from profit making and taking of these foreign banks. They may squirm, as they
do elsewhere, say in South Korea and Japan, but the prize of newfound profit is
worth the effort. No one should forget that China also benefits from the global
connections of these banks, and it sees in them an apprenticeship for its own
banks before taking market share away from these very same overseas banks, or
even buying shares in their ownership.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Jul 10, '08)
[Re America's
special grace, July 8] When Spengler refers to America's special grace
he is effectively joining forces with the most ideologically driven
counterpoint to Islamic extremism on the planet: America's Christian Zionists.
The Zionist's thirst for a showdown with Islam at the prophesied ... battle of
Armageddon is ultimately what drives the American military machine into the
biblical heartland of the Middle East. And standing at the front line of this
war to end all wars is the US Army Chaplain Center and School at Fort Jackson,
South Carolina, with its motto openly emblazoned in the Crusader language of
Latin - Pro Deo et Patria or "For God and Country". The following
"proponents" help sum up the strategic nature of its religious enterprise:
Honoring the sacred privilege to serve "For God and Country"
Developing Army Pentathlete Chaplains and Chaplain Assistants that are
spiritually fit and focused to support the mission
Strengthening the spiritual, moral and ethical dimensions of the Soldier's
Warrior Ethos
Altogether the US armed forces have about 1,400 chaplains who are all
Christian, except for about 30 rabbis and 15 imams. This elite squad of
Christian high priests will make sure that the "Soldier's Warrior Ethos" is
strengthened by turning a blind eye to their beloved warriors derogatorily
referring to Iraqi civilians as "hajis". They will make sure that the
"Soldier's Warrior Ethos" is not spiritually, morally and ethically damaged by
such damning revelations as the Haditha massacre, in which no marine has yet
been charged. And they will make sure that the "Soldier's Warrior Ethos" will
never die because of America's special grace.
Reverend Dr Vincent Zankin
Canberra (Jul 10, '08)
[Re America's
special grace, July 8] I agree with Spengler that the history of
America is one where many feel that God's hand was involved. I must disagree
with him, however, in his interpretation of the passage from Obama's book.
Obama is viewing the loss of connectedness in families and society as an
unfortunate occurrence. This is by no means a plea to return to traditional
society. Spengler is overreaching in the effort to find criticisms of Mr Obama.
James Fisher
USA (Jul 10, '08)
I just read "Spengler's latest:
America's special grace [July 8]. Pretty outrageous to say the least.
After spending a lot of time on the article I came to the conclusion that it
was written by a committee. That way no one is responsible for the conclusions
that all those words were leading up to. I'm definitely not talking about the
part about Obama. There is no irony involved with globalization providing the
means of endangered ethnicities asserting themselves. ... It feels like the
same group hubris that brought us the war and the business debacle ... all by
committee ... spread the guilt. And then Christianity can take care of some of
the more difficult parts. All that forgiveness and you just have to confess.
Please forgive me father for I keep making plans to destroy all the people in
the world who have bumped up against "The Modern World". It is never going to
happen.
Dee Hall (Jul 10, '08)
All the mainstream press had to do was mention "no-bid contracts" and "State
Department advisors" in the same breath and all the blood-for-oil theory
hucksters started a full-fledged media freakout. The gig, at last, is up, they
say. Nick Turse in
All the oil news that’s fit to print [July 8] stuck his neck out a
millimeter to proclaim that the war in Iraq has "something or other to do with
oil". Mr Turse doesn’t realize that everyone unwittingly agrees with him, just
as we all agree that the war has something or other to do with plumbing, and
that quarks have something or other to do with pudding. So-called alternative
media (as in: here's yet another way to mangle the facts) types love to pick on
the New York Times. But the Times long ago abandoned serious investigative
journalism, so what's the point? My buddy Steve doesn't mock his '68 Camaro
because it can't go 150 mph any more, with the engine pulled, sitting on
cinderblocks. He mourns it. I began to suspect that the blood-for-oil theory
was a non-starter after Noam Chomsky was kind enough respond to my e-mail. I
figured if anyone could back up the theory, he could. I asked him for his best
evidence. His response: Nothing else [WMD, terrorism, democratizing the Middle
East] made sense. So much for my Chomsky's-got-a-blood-for-oil-theory Theory.
It's Intelligent Design redux. When you can't make sense of something, you fall
back on whatever comforts you the most. It's a theory in constant search of
facts to mold to its predetermined conclusions. That's why Turse and others
play a waiting game. When certain facts don't fit the theory (two and a half
years of oil production contracts in Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq), you
don’t hear them caterwauling about the Kurds' role in blood-for-oil. It's not
an easy fit. So they wait. Then the mainstream press scoops their lazy asses
and divulges the no-bid contracts and State Department involvement, and in no
time flat it's a race to see who can outdo whom in the blood-for-oil-theory
feeding frenzy. The reason for the no-bid contracts and State Department
advisors is so ridiculously obvious, it's amazing that few mention it. For
those who've forgotten, America is hemorrhaging money and lives. Every major
market in Iraq is rigged to the extent possible in favor of American interests,
to stanch the hemorrhaging. One American government bureaucracy or another is
"advising" Iraq in virtually every major economic endeavor. You could invent a
blood-for-damn-near-anything-of-value theory if lack of free-market contracts
and US government involvement were used as supporting evidence. A word to the
gullible: pay close attention to what the hucksters IGNORE when foisting their
lame-brained theories on you.
Geoffrey Sherwood
New Jersey, USA (Jul 9, '08)
Pepe Escobar has got his leftist fantasies spinning again in
Big Oil's secret out of Iraq's closet [July 4]. Mr Escobar wants us to
believe that Western oil companies are going to steal all of Iraq's oil but
that's a pipe dream, no pun intended. No Iraqi government could survive turning
over control of Iraq oil without fair compensation. It is far more likely that
Western firms will spend hundreds of millions in Iraq only to be told the terms
of the agreement must be changed (see Venezuela) or Iraq will write them a
check for 90% of their investment and tell them to leave. I still believe China
will get the bulk of Iraq's oil; they are willing to pay through the nose for
it and can pay millions in bribes to Iraqi politicians. They can also order
Chinese oil engineers to go to Iraq at a cost of USD$15,000 a year. Western
firms will have to pay $200,000 to get a Western oil engineer to do the same
work. Mr Escobar makes the absurd claim, "At the Group of Eight summit in
Naples in July of 2001, it was decided the US would take out the Taliban by
October." Well, first the summit was held in Genoa not Naples. Could Mr Escobar
cite a source for his claim that can be checked? I looked and could find none.
His next paragraph tells how the Russians defeated plans to move Turkmenistan's
gas through Afghanistan into Pakistan and India through a pipeline. So why
would Russia approve a plan to topple the Taliban and build a pipeline they did
not want built? Also the US and Europe wanted the gas to go to Europe through
Turkey. If the Asian Development Bank is foolish enough to fund this pipeline
through Afghanistan they will never see their money again.
Dennis O'Connell
USA (Jul 9, '08)
[Re America's
special grace, July 8] Well, what Spengler has outlined is the reality
of the US as the Christian Fascist Empire ... Clearly the fraudulent fiscal
footwork, demonstrating a total lack of ethics in the US, along with the total
moral and ethical corruption of the body politic, should simply be ignored,
according to your sage.
Allen Jay (Jul 9, '08)
Exaggerated religiosity notwithstanding,
America's special grace, July 8, is a real gem, not so much in its
absolute correctness, but in its forceful framing. Practically, the US
unequivocally burdens the world disproportionately in energy consumption and
emissions; however, American spiritual and ideological impacts on the world are
controversial and constitute the "polar opposites". Such "polar opposites" can
be traced as polar opposites within the US, both in its history and
corresponding social development, both in the extent of its past transgressions
and the extraordinary feat in socially righting itself. A once profoundly
racist country, the "Grim Reaper of indigenous cultures" is on the verge of
having a supposed victim of cultural genocide as president. External racial
differences were once a seemingly insurmountable obstacle to assimilation.
While assimilation within the backdrop of racial similarity is more efficient,
assimilation across the racial divide requires tremendous education, political
maturity, political will and adaptiveness, and profound personal edification.
Assimilation across the racial divide is less efficient but has tremendous
social ramifications; transparency in the process is part and parcel, and
individualism regardless of race and traditional culture is strengthened,
together with awareness of age, handicap, sexual orientation discrimination
(the last over the influence of religiosity), etc. This is why and where the US
has tremendous spiritual and ideological impacts on the world, which China can
never hope to equal. In China and the old US white melting pot, once exposure
is unavoidable, a fraction within the minority will choose to jettison their
ethnicity efficiently and without fanfare, taking advantage of racial
similarity for social acceptance and economic benefits of being a part of the
majority. This fraction of human beings, larger for each advancing generation,
get what they and their offspring truly want and are then content both in
spirit and in substance. A politically correct Westerner may say they are the
(unconscientious) victims of cultural genocide, but they are the unqualified
beneficiaries of assimilation. No human beings have to be Tibetan or Russian to
be happy in spirit and substance, ever. It is sociologically deterministic that
the best future for Tibetans in China is assimilation - "cultural genocide".
Again, what is the significance to most Chinese, including the current
Tibetans, that China can never be socially as advanced (or provocative) as the
US? Some over 40 years old and handicapped in China may regret that their
country is not as socially advanced as the US, not Chinese of one or both
Tibetan parents.
Jeff Church
USA (Jul 9, '08)
The death of the American comedian George Carlin has made the issue of humor
and politics a stark reminder of the vapid failure of democracy in my country.
Carlin, famous for making the inequities of capitalism and imperialism a forum
for sobering comedy, routinely poked holes in all the sacred cows of myths,
lies, hypocrisies and denials that Americans cling to for moral sustenance. He
skewered the people who voted for politicians as well as the politicians they
voted for with equal quasi-evangelical fervor. He knew full well that the
corruption and amoral degeneration of government was merely a reflection of the
country as a whole, and in that, at least in one sense, democracy had lived up
to its hype. Though Carlin had been a noble successor to other
politically-aware comics, he long was considered a lone voice in the
wilderness, easy for conservatives to dismiss as just another hippie
America-hater whose audience was mostly burned-out potheads from the 60s and
70s. But the advent of the Daily Show and Colbert Report has provided
mainstream America with a regular and easily accessible source of political
commentary delivered via the vector of comedy. More significantly, these
self-styled "fake news" programs have provided a context with which the
injustices that Carlin railed against are delivered without the bitterness and
cynicism that he was accused of espousing. By lampooning the ridiculousness of
the Bush administration's Alice-in-Wonderland-like pronouncements, Americans
can see just how transparently mendacious and depraved "The Most Powerful Man
in the Free World" is: an emperor, not only naked, but devoid of human flesh or
soul. By contrast, the gentle, fawning approach to White House coverage offered
by "serious" news outlets exposes the depth and extent of the rot and
corruption pervasive in the corporate-controlled US media. So what is someone
to make of a nation where silly comedians are the moral bellwethers and
schooled journalists are nothing more than hacks carving sycophantic careers
out of stock cliches about patriotism and faux freedoms? I, for one, can
identify with Lewis Carroll's befuddled heroine who tried to negotiate with a
world where mad hatters and decapitating queens were fine, upstanding citizens.
I'm certain the press in Wonderland were all graduates of the Fox Network.
Hardy Campbell
Houston, Texas (Jul 9, '08)
[Re Now it's war
against India in Afghanistan , July 9] The long war - at times
quiescent, at other times hot - between India and Pakistan has found another
theater of operations. It's Afghanistan now. Troubles in Kashmir and militant
Muslim bombings in India proper find an echo in the suicide bombing of the
Indian embassy in Kabul. Among, India's dead a brigadier general and a veteran
diplomat. Although the embassy had warning of an attack, no concrete barriers
were thrown up to stop the suicide vehicle, and as such, the huge damage and
loss of life. It's an open secret that Pakistan is still smarting from three
defeats at India's hands. As Sudha Ramachandran points out, India's presence in
Afghanistan has gone against certain sectors of Pakistan's military and
Islamist fanatics grain; for these very forces think of Afghanistan as
Pakistan's playground. Thus, the confluence of strands of the hydra head of the
Indo-Pakistani rivalry has grown another hydra head in Kabul.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Jul 9, '08)
[Re Bush carves out
a legacy in Asia by MK Bhadrakumar, July 8]. Why does a lame duck cross
the road? You could say "lame duck" President George W Bush and his diplomatic
companion [Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice have left the White House with
beds unmade and dirty dishes in the sink. Not exactly a great way to go on a
trip, leaving the house in shambles. And as to success in Asia, however
powerful the nation, Bush is not exactly among friends at the G-8 summit, with
Japan unhappy about Bush's closer ties with North Korea and Russia not exactly
welcoming missile bases on its borders, be they in Poland or Lithuania. And you
can turn guns either way, I suppose, so who's heralding the arrival of Condi
and George other than other self-centered powerbrokers with their own agendas
waiting to be recognized? Judging from overnight events - with a suicide
bombing of India's embassy in Kabul and the US possibly bombing a "wedding
party" inadvertently - maybe Bush's hope for secondary success in Asia may not
be an easy trip. Also, take a second look at that "lame duck Bush". Looks like
a different bird to me ... Bhadrakumar may have used the wrong analogy. Bush,
in this case, may be paternally counting his fathered chickens before they've
hatched. Success even in Asia may not come easily, if at all. That could be a
real let-down for whatever bird ... plus going home again to a messy house that
needs a lot of cleaning up. It's going to take more than mop and broom to
ship-shape our present domestic crisis.
Beryl K
Gullsgate, Minnesota, USA (Jul 8, '08)
Islamism shakes
Kashmir [July 8] should have been titled Islamism shakes Kashmir:
Hinduism shakes rest of India. One is surprised to read this article not
mentioning the violent "Bharat Band" of the Vishva Hindu Parishad [VHP] and the
Bharatiya Janata Party [BJP] robbing the peace of people in many places,
inciting riots at Indore and Jammu. I agree that the Congress party has
completely mishandled the transfer of land to the Amarnath Shrine Board. Forty
hectares (100 acres) of land allotted to the shrine should not have been
opposed by the People's Democratic Party [PDP] and the [National Conference
Legislature Party]. This shrine is pious for Hindus and the present
arrangements are absolutely inadequate. Ghulam Nabi Azad and the out-going
governor Mr Sinha should have [sought] major political parties' consent before
allotting this land. The Congress party has committed a grave mistake by
hastily revoking the land allotment. The PDP has not learned a lesson from
Karnataka and preferred to topple the government, even when their demand to
revoke the land transfer was implemented by the Congress party. It is not
Islamism but narrow vote-bank politics that are the root cause of the present
crisis which is happily being exploited by BJP/VHP elsewhere in India.
A N Samma (Jul 8, '08)
[Re Froth comes
off latte economy, July 8] The downsizing of Starbucks should gather
steam as the slowdown in the US economy quickens. As the author points out,
Starbucks, a classic byproduct of the bubble frenzies of the past decade and
whose success is predicated on the availability of easy money, adds absolutely
nothing substantive to the real economy. When all is said and done, I suspect
the coffee chain will be no more than 40% of its current size and its devotees
will be able to get their caffeine fix at a significantly reduced cost.
Separately, I would not be so quick to accord President Bush much kudos for
crafting a successful legacy in Asia; for as they say, the game is far from
over. [Re Bush
carves out a legacy in Asia by M K Bhadrakumar, July 8], the affable
commander-in-chief's missteps in the Middle East and elsewhere have not been a
result of unfavorable circumstances, but rather represent additional examples
of a lifetime of failure.
John Chen
USA (Jul 8, '08)
[Re Running away
from themselves by Muhammad Cohen [July 8]. The reason Barack Obama is
shifting and flipping on issues like a yo-yo is because he is trying to lure
the American independent voters who could win him the election. It is said that
Al Gore lost to George W Bush in 2000 precisely because the independent voters
fell into [Bush's] basket like flies attracted to rotten meat. In changing his
position and flip-flopping on a juggler's rope, Obama has ended his honeymoon
with the grassroots Democrats who do not approve or like his new moderate
position on Iraq, terrorism, God or guns. Many Republicans are jokingly saying
that it is Obama who is running for Bush's third term in office and not McCain
who is so far too slow - perhaps because of his arthritic knees - to catch up
with the changing mood of voters. I believe that it is political wisdom more
than heroism that Barack Obama is now treading carefully over the timetable of
troop withdrawal from Iraq, and at the same time trying to hold the enthusiasm
of his supporters and entice as many activist voters from other camps. I
believe that on election day in November, the Democrats will forgive and forget
any adjustment by Obama on political issues and think only of the stark choice:
another four years of John McCain in President Bush's cowboy hat and boots, and
an inferno that would follow and engulf our globe. Personally, I believe that
Barack Obama is the best shot and the best buy that the Americans have in hand.
Saqib Khan
UK (Jul 8, '08)
Strip Close encounters
with North Korea [July 8] of its sentimentality and to its essentials,
and John Feffer does speak to the real and political worries of Japanese about
North Korea's abduction of young Japanese men and women. He dwells more on a
rehash of Charles Robert Jenkins' The Reluctant Communist which is
hardly ground-breaking news since Jenkins' long years in North Korea are more
or less well known. Jenkins' wife, the Japanese abductee Soga Hitomi, would
have been a better subject, but the reader has the impression that Feffer has
only read her husband's book and had no access to her for surely she knew and
lived among the Japanese abductees in Pyongyang. As for the matter of President
Bush's indifference to the plight and the fate of Japanese abductees, it may
well have fit into the style of negotiations between Pyongyang and Washington,
that is of confrontation and compromise. So, where Mr Bush may have been
willing to concede a point to Kim Jong-Il, he knew that [Japan's] hard stand in
dealing with Pyongyang would pressure North Korea to soften on an agenda point.
In any case, now Mr Bush - having made a breakthrough with Mr Kim - is in a
position to show more compassion to the fate of the Japanese that North Korea
abducted, and Prime Minister [Yasuo] Fukuda is willing to engage Pyongyang
again as it reopens what it said were closed dossiers on the Japanese
abductees.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Jul 8, '08)
[Re How to stop
the Great Crash of '08, July 1] Dear Spengler, I suspect you might
recognize the situation for what it really looks like. However, I wanted to
write to you to see the possibilities of empire collapse, similar to the Soviet
Union, and the effect it would have on everything from the sunshine we see
every day, to whether our children will ever live like we did again. A few
notable points for you to consider.
1. The oil is running out. Peak oil is here whether we like it or not.
American society, or the Anglo-Saxon model is built, industrially, on oil
consumption. I'm shitting myself at the consequences of oil depletion and the
effect that it will have on the world population. They say that if oil vanished
overnight, it will do so because depletion and usage rates are rising
astronomically and production rates are falling collapsingly. To put it
bluntly, 80% of the world population will die starving because of the economic
models, and all of the infrastructure that goes with them has led us to build
this society based upon oil. Is the empty pipeline about to enter our society
from behind us?
2. America went to Afghanistan. To quote, Rudyard Kipling "Afghanistan
is where great powers go to die." I think it's happening again, as it happened
to the Soviets, the British, and just about every other empire that decided to
go and crack its head in that forsaken place. It's happening to America. You
can see it every day, everywhere you look the signs are there, so obvious and
almost in your face.
3. Multicultural society. Are we heading for racial civil wars in
"cultural melting pots"? If so, what should we do about it, go back to our
motherlands? And even if we did, if points 4,5, and 6 don't get us, then number
1 will. And if the combination of them all doesn't get us, then we will
probably end it all anyway.
4. The greater depression. Looks like we have blown up any credibility
of the banking system working in our favor for a long time. Are we in
wheelbarrow/tomatoes times?
5. Looks likely that the long march towards World War III has started. Will
it encompass every single living thing on this planet? Meaning: go nuclear? If
it does, what the hell do we do then?
6. Climate change is a daily visible problem now. Are we to see rainfall
and snow in the Saudi desert? Will Mother Earth ever forgive us for messing
with her, or is she about to get revenge for every day that we have poked her
landscape?
7. Religious rising. All faiths are reaffirming their blind association
with God - Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. Are the extremists winning on
these three fronts or just gently pushing us towards war with one another?
Maybe it's just the wrong battle we are fighting here, maybe the above battles
are the ones we need to be concentrating on.
8. Food crisis. There is definitely not enough land for six billion
people with lifestyles so wanting of sheikhdom. What do we use this land for -
energy production, food, or what?
9. Family breakdown. I went on a plant tour the other day. Funnily
enough, I saw loads of different people from different environments. What I did
notice with a great degree of interest was how broken the family had become.
Are we even capable of going through hard times with the help of the family
unit if there is no unit?
10. Quicksand. How do you get yourself out of a deep, quicksand-type,
sticky, messy, asphyxiation-based, [mess] like this?
I would love an article or your views on these questions, from a strategic
point of view, they make enormous sense. Perhaps you could even ask the other
writers to start confirming the possibilities of contributing to such a mammoth
task. I would call it "where do we go now?"
Amar (Jul 7, '08)
Thank you for writing. I am not as pessimistic as you are. To begin with it is
not difficult to increase food production. The US state of Louisiana could
produce enough rice to feed the world; it never did so because there wasn't
much profit in it. New hybrid seeds can triple corn production in the Global
South, etc. And I don't think we are running out of oil - it simply will cost
more to produce. If we take into account tar sands in Canada and Venezuela at
$60 a barrel production cost, we have a couple of Saudi Arabias right there,
not to mention the new Brazilian discoveries, etc. Drastic energy-saving
measures (electric cars most importantly) also will be important. But the
transition will be very rough, and I agree that the economy will be dreadful
for some years. As for ethnic wars: I have been writing about this for years.
It is not only depression, but also boom, that breeds such conflicts, because
globalization erodes traditional society and casts in doubt the cultural
survival of many peoples. The nuclear problem is hard to figure. The North
Korean solution is encouraging in one respect, but I fear that the Iranian
issue will involve violence. Like World War I, I think a little early violence
will prevent a great deal of violence later on. And climate change is not my
area. From what I can tell, the changes if any are likely to be smaller and
more gradual than Al Gore suggests. - Spengler (Jul
7, '08)
Thank you for your article
Vietnam's reforms on the line [June 28]. The political dynamics in
Vietnam may offer opportunities for party split and explosion to transform from
a single-party system to a multiparty system. If it so happens, China may
follow suit and its rise will cause less nervousness within the world
community. A party split is the shortest way to form a multiparty system.
Robert Le (Jul 7, '08)
[Re How to stop
the Great Crash of '08, July 1] Often there is more information in what
is not making news than in the stuff that is. The global warming hype that had
reached a fever pitch with Al Gore's movie An Inconvenient Truth and
with Hurricane Katrina, that the global warmists were sure was nature's revenge
for SUVs, has gone eerily quiet. There's more news in their silence than in the
convenient lies about the evils of carbon dioxide that they had tried to foist
upon us. It's a case of good riddance to bad rubbish.
Cha-am Jamal
Thailand (Jul 7, '08)
Zhou Yi's The curse of a
perfect eight, Jul 1, 2008] should be published in some hearsay papers,
not mainstream media such as ATol. The speech is as ridiculous as that of
Sharon Stone. Mr Zhou simply wants to express his dislike of China and Chinese
people by trying to relate tragedies to meaningless numbers, although
unfortunately, he seems to claim to be one of them. If Mr Zhou was right, then,
according to the theory of yin and yang, people could use the strength of their
minds to move an object when the number of people is big enough. Then, people
like Mr Zhou should be careful because if all the 1.3 billion Chinese people
got angry at you and cursed you at the same time, you would have trouble ...
but don't worry, Mr Zhou, yin and yang are not so evil, neither are the Chinese
people, although you seem not to have understood either of them at all. Yin and
yang mean the spirit of harmony of [between] humans and nature and among human
beings themselves. We are living in a world frequented by tragedies. What we
should do is to offer sympathy, help or even quiet, instead of licking one's
chops or cursing. Many Chinese people will feel sad when they hear of floods in
Bangladesh, tornados in the US, famine in Africa and icebergs melting in the
Arctic. They have also been moved to tears when seeing help coming from abroad
after the [Sichuan] quake. Chinese people are just like people in other corners
of this planet. They don't deserve a curse ...
Giant Panda
Chengdu, China (Jul 7, '08)
In A new world under one
heaven, July 4, Francesco Sisci takes a sociological rather than a
political perspective. He writes, "The term (huaren) implies that those
who can speak 'Chinese' and behave 'Chinese' are 'Chinese'. That is, they are
'civilized people' (huaren), regardless of blood origin. The only other
example we can find of this concept and attitude is in America, with its policy
of integration of all immigrants." While the overall thrust of social
similarity between China and the US is partly valid, Sisci scholarly frames
social reality in terms of a concept. In the US, the white melting pot had
existed before it was coined as a concept. He who had a white face and spoke
American regional English was considered by first impression as an American by
other Americans who did likewise. I doubt if there was really a concept of huaren
regardless of blood origin in old China. The old reality was likely also that
he who had an East Asian face, spoke Han Chinese, and behaved Han was seen as a huaren
by other huarens, who did likewise. Historically, individuals had
obtained social inclusion and economic benefits by racial similarity in both
countries. Many non-Anglo-Saxon whites maximized social acceptance by
jettisoning their ethnicity, thus there were Natalie Wood (born Russian Natasha
Nikolaevna Zakharenko), Robert Blake (born Italian Vincenzo Gubitosi), etc.
More recently such concepts are coined in both countries. In the US there is a
campaign to champion integration across the racial divide by compulsory
exposure, such as forced busing of children against the wishes of both black
and white parents. Moreover, not all Americans came from immigration. Even some
whites came with California and Texas through conquest. Sisci continues,
"Countering the idea of a grand Han nationalism and of other people living in
the Zhongguo, the communists adopted the Soviet strategy of recognizing
ethnic minorities and granting them special status." The communists actually
were instrumental in formulating writing systems for a few preliterate
minorities so that their language could, hopefully, be bolstered. Did the
communists once champion segregation or did they respect differences?
Ultimately, do individuals want to be merely respected or do they want to be
included? Do the communists now commit cultural genocide? Did the US then
commit segregation or does it now commit cultural genocide? I think it depends
on whether one takes a sociological perspective or a political one. Socially, a
person who assimilates does not need ethnicity to be happy, but most in the
clan think otherwise or believe that tradition is a personal obligation, then
demand segregation of others in the clan from other clans or the majority.
Jeff Church
USA (Jul 7, '08)
In US and China go bump
in the Middle East [June 28], Khody Akhavi cites John Garver's The Vital
Triangle: China, the United States, and the Middle East, and alludes to
the US's political baggage. The triangle is really a tripod with democratic
ideology, Judeo-Christianity, and the American economic welfare as the three
legs that support the political baggage. If the tripod is really a single pole
of economic interest based on oil (letter by Mel Cooper, June 30), the US's
relation with Canada would have been far less cordial. If the US political
baggage is to turn into cold or hot war with China, either one leg has to be
severely crippled or three separate thresholds have to be reached with
cumulative impact. Moreover, democratic ideology and religion are themselves
multifaceted. China can be viewed as a threat to both by some Americans;
however, enough American Christians want Chinese souls and thus have to be
cordial with the Chinese people, and similarly and in similar consideration and
accompaniment, enough American democrats want Chinese minds. Enough Americans
in the foreign policy elite are and will remain far from having given up on the
Chinese people and a China that the world can live with; the alternative, the
shunning of China, will remain unattractive, unnecessary, and retrogressive.
Last, apropos social progress within the US, the abatement of racism forms a
dominant backdrop in the American China policy. It seems to me that many
Chinese do not acknowledge the relevance of social progress in the US ...
Jeff Church
USA (Jul 3, '08)
[Re Tehran puts on
a show of strength, July 2] With all due respect to Mr Moubayed, who is
probably quite aware of the fact, we no longer live in an age of steam-driven
dreadnaughts or squadrons of bombers. The time of human wave assaults backed by
massed artillery likewise belongs to early in the last century. Armies go
swiftly in the night these days, when they go at all. If we have returned to
the past, it is to the ballistic missiles of the Cold War. However, these now
fly closer to the ground and at hypersonic speeds. Mir-Faisal Bagherzadeh may
dig holes in the ground to amuse the public, but he and his staff are more
concerned with the operational status of their Sunburn-II battalions. The West
knows quite well that Iran (as Persia, the once pivotal empire of Central Asia)
isn't Iraq. Iran is a functional representative republic, and its military (no
longer a police force for a despot) serves its national interests. The Iranian
General Staff is just as informed as its counterparts elsewhere in the world
and, increasingly, commands as respected an arsenal. To steal a phrase from T E
Lawrence, the focus operandi of the Iranian administration is
theological rather than logical. With religion as the prime motivating factor,
any sort of madness and depravity is likely to occur.
James A F Compton
CPT CA SMR
La Mesa, California USA (Jul 3, '08)
[Re Seoul's summer of
discontent, July 2] The streets of Seoul are alive with protests.
Protests have become a daily occurrence for the last two months since President
Lee Myung-bak agreed to the reintroduction of US beef imports. Protesters are
calling for Mr Lee's resignation for allowing what they consider tainted beef
into South Korea. Protests have deepened in appeal and have spread to segments
of the population that until now have stood on the sidelines. Violence against
protesters has garnered much popular sympathy, and not since the days of Park
Chung Hee's Yushin constitution and martial law, has Seoul seen the clergy take
to the streets in open support of the demand for Mr Lee's demission. It would
be wrong to see in these protests which partly have the air of a carnival and
partly a provocation of authority, as a vicarious revenge for the defeat of the
left at the polls in December 2007. This assertion does not hold water the more
especially since Mr Lee carried the majority of the electorate as a candidate
and his party, the Grand National Party (GNP). took the lion's share of seats
in parliament. The fault, I fear, lies solely with president Lee Myung-bak, who
misread the temper of the people who voted him into power by signing an
agreement during his visit to the White House allowing imports of US beef which
the public fears may contain impurities and thus be a carrier of mad cow
disease. Which may not be true, but it is the public's perception which is
paramount and the negative symbolism that US beef represents. Mr Lee has a
management style which when he was in private industry earned him the tag "The
Bulldozer". His forceful decision-making power in the private sector may wear
well, but it is counterproductive in a democracy, and hence the turmoil that we
are witnessing on the highways and byways of Seoul. Donald Kirk is right in
describing the protests as turning up the summer's high temperature, and what
is more, a portent of the swelling of protests against US beef is today's
announcement in the Financial Times that US President George Bush, who
cancelled plans to visit Seoul in July, has rescheduled his trip to August
after the G-8 meeting in Tokyo. If Mr Lee is a very unpopular figure, to South
Koreans in the current climate, Mr Bush comes in a close second. Which all goes
to say that summer 2008 in South Korea well deserves the description as a
summer of discontent.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Jul 3, '08)
This year may very well see the implementation of the people's-living-first
policy in North Korea, but the salient phrase in
Pyongyang tests market skills with nibbles [July 2], is "building an
independent national economy", which in no way betrays North Korea's goal nor
contradicts the ideology of juche nor violates the Cholima spirit. Since
the collapse of the Soviet Union, North Korea has had to adapt to harsh
economic realities. It is doing it with a "made in North Korea" logo. It is not
taking the capitalist road a la China, nor is it willing to appear that
it is simply throwing its own ideology and party structure overboard. Korea
watchers, particularly political economists from eastern Europe and Russia,
have long commented on the small steps which the Kim Jong-il regime has been
experimenting with in the market and instituting reforms piecemeal to meet
economic realities. Although old core members of the regime may have a concrete
mindset, Mr Kim is expanding younger cadres, many of whom have briefly studied
in the US and Europe, and who are quite savvy in high tech and the ways of the
global market. Saying this does not logically lead to the conclusion that North
Korea is taking on a capitalist cast. It would be a put down to put it as an
inevitability. North Korea is incredibly intransigent on this point with much
fanfare [and] mystery.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Jul 3, '08)
[Does Iran have
Bush over a barrel?, July 2] Despite the popular punditry that purports
the primacy of petroleum in the president's policies, it is Bush's obsession
with messianism that guides him towards war with Iran. Indeed, this concern for
his immortal soul can provide some explanations for a course of bellicose
action that can only drive oil prices in the direction of Pluto. Many have
surmised, because of Bush's ... relationship with the Saudis and the black
riches buried beneath Iraqi soil, that oil security has been the sine qua non
of his fixation on the Middle East. That is, in fact, secondary to Bush's
determination to reunite the Jews with the Christians in the Holy Land,
presaging the return of Christ and their final conflict with Satan. Iran
assumes the role of a demonic force simply because it is does not kowtow to US
imperialism and is determined to build nuclear weapons to defend itself from
that hegemony. It was always Bush's plan to use a docile and quiescent Iraq as
a base for undermining the Persian theocracy and creating another compliant
puppet state. Alas, it now appears that, since quite the opposite seems to be
occurring, Plan B, an attack on Iran by US and Israeli forces, is the only way
Bush can ensure that the Jewish state remains the only nuclear power in the
region. A toothless Iran will guarantee Israel's survival until Bush's messiah
returns, an event that he and his neo-conmen are certain will make their
error-ocracy worthwhile. But if they are wrong (and their track record so far
is, oh, I don't know, 0-for-everything), then their legacy will be two lost
wars, priceless oil, a corrupt and bankrupt government, a resurgent Islam, and
a demoralized American society. Like many here and around the world, for me the
date of January 20, 2009, promises to be full of joy and unbridled relief.
Assuming, of course, we make it that far.
Hardy Campbell
Houston, Texas (Jul 2, '08)
[Re A poisoned
chalice, July 2] Who would deny that any newly elected president of the
US taking office in January 2009 drinks from a poisoned economic chalice? Be it
a president Obama or a president McCain, he will inherit from President Bush a
large shopping bag of economic and social woes. It does take much thinking to
see that the US is in a deep recession in spite of the chorus of naysayers who
say it isn't. Obviously, there is much to do to try to remedy a bad mess that
the new president will have to clean up. Senator Obama offers a ray of hope
that new thinking in the White House may turn around a sagging dollar, a
heavily skewered tax base which favors the rich, rising fuel prices, growing
unemployment in all sectors, spiking cost of food, a horrific health care
system, and so on and on and on. Senator McCain says that he knows nothing in
economics; his solutions parrot Mr Bush's, which have if anything made more
fragile America's economy. As to specifics, Mr Obama is a practical man who
seeks out commonsense solutions. Mr McCain, it seems, will flip flop on the
least sign of rain in the economic sky. Mr Obama has no choice; as president,
he will have to drink from the dregs of Mr Bush's wine cellar. Saying this, one
has to remember that any melioration in the sad state of failed Bushonomics and
social policy signifies a shift in opportunities in getting a good grip on
current problems. A windfall tax on the oil companies, a recalibration of the
tax code whereby the super rich have to pay a large share of the bill for a
crumbling US, and I do mean crumbling. Look at the sad state of the
infrastructure that Mr Hutchinson laments in today's ATol story
Infrastructure's inefficiencies. The list of immediate do's is long,
but doable. Any positive step will have the effect of a shot of Vitamin B2 in
the country's morale. A reason Mr Obama seized the initiative and won the
nomination to his party, is plain and simple: he spoke truth to the electorate
which in a glitz-and-glamor Washington is a breath of fresh air. The man on the
street knows how terrible conditions are in Mr Bush's America; he despairs and
abstains from elections because he knows full well that his vote is meaningless
in a Bush world where money, and money alone, rules. Maybe with Mr Obama in the
White House, the rule of money won't disappear, but he may show a degree of
concern for his fellow citizens which has been absent these eight years of Mr
Bush's presidency.
Junzo Nakamura (Jul 2, '08)
[Re 'Weak' Iran
ripe to be attacked, July 2] Too many theories are swirling around the
blogosphere these days. Will President Bush give the green light to unleash an
attack on Iran? Were I a tout, I would give odds he wouldn't. Yet, Seymour
Hirsch writing in the current issue of The New Yorker makes a good case for a
lightning strike on Iran, even cynically suggesting that were Senator Obama
elected the next president, a day or two or three before his inauguration, Mr
Bush as commander in chief will issue the order to attack. Michael Klare is
hedging his bets, with a qualified yes and a qualified no. Then there's the
10-ton gorrilla in the Middle East with its threats to bomb Iran. And then
there are the oil industry pundits who see in such speculation a trigger to
increase sharply the price of a barrel of oil and without necessarily
connecting it to a tripwire weaking the American dollar further. What we are
witnessing these days in Washington and Tehran and Jerusalem reminds one of the
last scene in the iconic film Rebel Without a Cause. Recall the car race
to the cliff's edge to see who will brake first, and the one who didn't
basically committed suicide to prove he had testicles. Iran has played cat and
mouse with Mr Bush's macho image, and has gotten away with it royally in higher
oil prices. Should Mr Bush launch a war, his country would explode as it did
after president Nixon's invasion of Cambodia or with the assassination of Dr
Martin Luther King; markets would collapse, and anarchy would reign in world
markets. Such is a credible scenario. Were Mr Bush educable, he would cut a
deal with Iran following the same script that he used in negotiating with North
Korea. But therein lies a tale ...
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Jul 2, '08)
Wariss Shaw [letters June 30] has wished for some sweet memories for Saleem
Shahzads' respite. I offer the following soul inspiring lines of Writhing
Cinders [an ATol letter writer] for him to ponder one night before going to
sleep for a little inspiration. The best song and the most beautiful
music for me is one that my heart sings perennially, thud of my immortal
connect. My mid-night and pre-dawn tears, unseen, unheard, I eternally cherish.
The music will go on and so my mid-night tears till I am lifted off from my
biological cage and dissolve onto my soul to sing together.
There may be many up in the hills singing it in their souls while fighting
aliens in Afghanistan.
Soni Mahiwal Chenaby
Pakistan (Jul 2, '08)
I usually write in to defend some interpretations of India concerning
corruption, development, etc. This time, however, I feel that Chan Akya is spot
on in Incredible
India, indeed [July 1]. India needs to address its education problems:
teacher truancy is a huge problem, and children aren't getting quality
education, if they get any education at all. One of the only ways this will
change is if Indian media (which to their credit, have usually been critical of
the government) get their act together concerning corruption, and every school
in every village is monitored and written about by the papers, checking for
corruption, teachers that don't show up, lack of textbooks, etc. Here in
Canada, that happens all the time in the media (for example, the Toronto Star
and the Catholic School Board in Toronto), even though Canada is one of the
world's most developed countries. India has a long way to go in this respect,
and faces dire demographic consequences if it does not act. Good job ATol!
Andrew (Jul 2, '08)
Sami Moubayed seems to believe that the United States is no match for the
military of Iran in
Tehran puts on a show of strength [July 2]. If one compares the US
military versus Iraq in Gulf War I (1991), in 100 hours and 130 dead the US
defeated Saddam Hussien's Iraq. How had the Iranian military managed their
eight-year war with Iraq (1980-88)? Over 300,000 dead and over half a million
seriously wounded and, having lost the last four major battles of the war,
agreed to a cease fire. The US military is not configured to be an occupation
army, it is set up to destroy other armies in the field. An attack on Iran if
it comes will not be a ground war, but strictly an air war. Mr Moubayed
believes Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz, but they do not have that
capability. The strait is 32 miles wide at its narrowest. The Iranians tried to
mine the straits in 1988 and President Reagan destroyed two large Iranian naval
vessels and the Iranians backed off. The strait is also the economic life-line
of the Iranian economy so any attempt to close it would have very negative
effects on Iran. As for threats against Iran driving up the cost of oil, I
believe oil speculation is far more responsible accounting for around $40 of
the price of a barrel of oil. The president and US Congress could stop this by
getting rid of the Enron loophole (one of Bill Clinton's last gifts to America)
and tightening up margin speculating in future oil contracts. However this will
not be done because the Washington political elite are far more concerned with
the interests of billionaire hedge fund managers than the American people.
Dennis O'Connell
USA (Jul 2, '08)
Dear Sami Moubayed, your article
Tehran puts on a show of strength [July 2] is well written and
interesting, but why do you - as an intellectual - resort to untruthful name
creations like "Arabian Gulf", when you have the "Persian Gulf" in mind? You
know well that this body of water has always had the name "Persian Gulf". If
you like I can provide you with Saudi maps as [recent] as the late 1960s
clearly containing the name khalij al-farsi.
Nima Rezai (Jul 2, '08)
Zhao Yi's article The
curse of a perfect eight [July 1] should not even be printed as he is
spreading superstition using all those feng shui viewpoints. It shows
that China has freed itself from a lot of these superstitions prevalent during
the pre-liberation period. Zhjao Yi forgot to emphasize that the 7th month in
the lunar calendar is called the "ghost month". I think Mr Zhao would not even
dare to go out of his house during that month unless it is of absolute
necessity.
Wendy Cai
USA (Jul 1, '08)
Today at the port of Nampo, near Pyongyang, the US delivered 100,000 short tons
of wheat to a North Korea threatened with famine. Succor to stave off massive
starvation in North Korea is but further proof of President George W Bush's
breakthrough in dealing with Kim Jong-il's regime after it had turned over in
Beijing a full list of its nuclear activities. As Jim Lobe quietly observes in
Rare Bush success leaves sour taste [July 1], such a diplomatic coup
would have delighted the heart of Mr Bush who had previously vowed to bring
regime change to North Korea. Power politics being what they are, especially
after Pyongyang detonated a nuclear device, with a savvy use of traditional
diplomacy with a dash of ambiguity in the use of coercive force, Bush's
negotiator Christopher Hill broke North Korea's seemingly intractable stance on
the nuclear question. And as a sign of its sincerity, Pyongyang blew up its
plutonium-producing plant's silo at Yongbyon. Yet even a hint of schadenfreude
[deriving pleasure from the misfortune of others] was absent from Bush's
announcement that he had removed North Korea from the Trading with the Enemy
Act and the list of terrorist states; he simply put Pyongyang on warning. Thus,
in harsh words, he turned a moment of his administration's rare success in
foreign affairs into a moment of sour grapes, and diminished any personal
stature that he might have earned.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Jul 1, '08)
[Re Malaysia's
Anwar stopped in his tracks, July 1] Is it deja vu, the same thing all
over again in Malaysia? If anyone thought that the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN)
would fade quietly from Malaysia's political scene, well, think again. It
suffered, as the leading party in the United Malays Nasional Organization
(UNMO), a stunning defeat in the 2008 elections. Not only that Anwar Ibrahim,
once the chosen successor of former prime minister Mahatir Mohammed, had woven
together a strong coalition of Malays, Chinese, and Indians to threaten the
unbroken half-century rule of the UNMO. Mahatir put on a show trial which sent
Anwar to prison on trumped up charges of sodomy. There he languished until the
high court overturned his conviction and freed him, yet he was muzzled under a
ban until March 2008, to run for public office. Prime Minister Abdullah Badew
trying to cut the favorable political ground under Anwar, to his own
misjudgment called a snap election to deny Anwar a seat in parliament. Anwar's
coalition put the UNMO into a minority position in parliament and it snatched
five important constituencies from UNMO control. There seemed no stopping Anwar
from his ultimately becoming prime minister. Malaysia's political terrain,
today, is cleared for warfare since new sodomy charges have been brought
against Anwar. Fearing for his safety, he sought refuge in Turkey's Embassy in
Kuala Lumpur. Like the original charges for sodomy against him, it looks as
though we are witnessing a replay of the original scenario which effectively
kept Anwar out of the public sphere for six years and out of public affairs for
10. UNMO's defeat at the polls is a sign of its decline, and that Malaysia is
on the verge impending change, but like a wounded bull elephant which is
running amok and crushing everything in its path, in order to avoid or delay
its death. Nonetheless the new sodomy charges have stalled Anwar's ascendancy
now. Will Malaysians see this example of [dirty] pool for what it is? A
concerted effort of a morally gangrenous political coalition that has outlived
its time. In looking at another charge of sodomy against Anwar, it brings to
mind a pithy remark of a German philosopher who observed: "the first time, it
is tragedy, the second time, comedy". What we are seeing has the feel of a
tragic comedy as Malaysia now teeters on the brink of an uncertain future.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Jul 1, '08)
In his letter Chrysantha Wijeyasingha [June 30] suggests that India endorses
Taiwanese independence with the "sale of weaponry, transfer of military
technology, and the training of Taiwan's military" to retaliate the China's
"incursions into India's land" alleged by the Indian media (and Indian media
only). I can't help wondering: What "weaponry" or "military technology" can
India sell or transfer to Taiwan? Is India in such a position to do so? Last
time I checked, India, like China was still a net importer when it comes to
weaponry and military technology. As to training Taiwan's military, I have a
feeling the Taiwanese will say "Thanks, but no thanks" to the Indians and stick
to Singapore. If India simply wants to snub [Beijing] by recognizing Taiwanese
independence, it doesn't have to be this complicated. A simple statement
followed by recalling the Indian ambassador from Beijing will do. ...
Juchechosunmanse
Beijing (Jul 1, '08)
June Letters
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
Copyright 1999 - 2008 Asia Times Online
(Holdings), Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
|
|
|
