Libyan Rebels Having Some Success...

I don't know much about the factions in Libya, but it's hard to imagine a group I'd not prefer to Mohamar Gahdaffi.  So I was happy to read that the rebels there are having some success against Gahdaffi's forces...

News Overload...

There's so much happening in the world right now...I'm overwhelmed.  I have the sense that we're all witnessing something that potentially is of the same historical import as the fall of the Soviet Union.  It seems like the world's attention isn't particularly focused on the events in the Middle East.  They're in the news, but for a lot of it I have to dig a bit on the inter-tubes.  But the news is there, though it's very hard to be sure what to place credence in.

Libya, Yemen, Iran, Bahrain all appear to have active revolts taking place (though with greatly differing prospects of success).  Gadaffi is slaughtering hundreds of his subjects.  The governments of Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, and UAE are all taking various actions designed to tamp down any revolutionary efforts – though for most of these it's not clear how much those actions were actually needed to maintain the current regimes' power.  Our president says nothing at all about the situation; offers no support, exhibits no leadership either domestically or internationally.  This shames me, as this is exactly the sort of situation in which the world looks to the U.S. for leadership.  Where will the leadership come from?  China?  Russia?  France?

One thing that keeps running through my mind are the predictions of the “domino effect” in the Middle East by a host of neocons in the early 2000s, and by Natan Sharansky.  The scenarios they outlined as likelihoods bear a striking resemblance to what's actually happening...

This morning I read of the earthquake in New Zealand; as I read the death toll stood at 65, with hundreds still unaccounted for.  I visited the city of Christchurch back in the '70s, while I was in the U.S. Navy; somehow my having been there makes the devastation seem a little more real than the typical news report.  There's little any of us can do to help; all we can do is hope for the best...

The Point of No Return...

An outstanding long article by Jeffrey Goldberg in Atlantic on the situation in the Middle East, mainly Iran vs. Israel.  There's far too much good stuff there to excerpt meaningfully, but here's a small sample:

Rahm Emanuel suggested that the administration is trying to thread a needle: providing “unshakeable” support for Israel; protecting it from the consequences of an Iranian nuclear bomb; but pushing it toward compromise with the Palestinians. Emanuel, in our meeting, disputed that Israel is incapable of moving forward on the peace process so long as Iran looms as an existential threat. And he drafted the past six Israeli prime ministers—including Netanyahu, who during his first term in the late 1990s, to his father’s chagrin, compromised with the Palestinians—to buttress his case. “Rabin, Peres, Netanyahu, Barak, Sharon, Olmert—every one of them pursued some form of a negotiated settlement, which would have been in Israel’s own strategic interest,” he said. “There have been plenty of other threats while successive Israeli governments have pursued a peace process. There is no doubt that Iran is a major threat, but they didn’t just flip the switch on [the nuclear program] a year ago.”

Emanuel had one more message to deliver: for the most practical of reasons, Israel should consider carefully whether a military strike would be worth the trouble it would unleash. “I’m not sure that given the time line, whatever the time line is, that whatever they did, they wouldn’t stop” the nuclear program, he said. “They would be postponing.”

It was then that I realized that, on some subjects, the Israelis and Americans are still talking past each other. The Americans consider a temporary postponement of Iran’s nuclear program to be of dubious value. The Israelis don’t. “When Menachem Begin bombed Osirak [in Iraq], he had been told that his actions would set back the Iraqis one year,” one cabinet minister told me. “He did it anyway.”

One of Those Mornings...

I'm having one of those mornings when, after reading the news, I just feel disgusted with the “leadership” of the world's political leaders.  The proximate cause (this time) was reading various European and American leaders reacting to recent events in Iran, Turkey, Egypt, and Gaza.  It feels a bit like some sort of macabre charade in which everyone sees the bad guys, but pretends they're not bad – and instead starts beating up the only good guy in the area!

Bah.

A pox on them all!

I'm going to go do something interesting and meaningful, like drive to work and immerse myself in Java and JavaScript...

Could Israel Attack Iran on Her Own?

Retired Israeli General Dan Halutz has some doubts...

Assyrian Tablet Decoding...

National Geographic talks about the decoding of this Assyrian baked clay tablet.  It seems to document the everyday inner workings of the government...

Scary News of the Day...

The White House will shelve Bush administration plans to build a missile-defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic, a move likely to cheer Moscow and roil the security debate in Europe.
The U.S. will base its decision on a determination that Iran's long-range missile program hasn't progressed as rapidly as previously estimated, reducing the threat to the continental U.S. and major European capitals, according to current and former U.S. officials.

The findings, expected to be completed as early as next week following a 60-day review ordered by President Barack Obama, would be a major reversal from the Bush administration, which pushed aggressively to begin construction of the Eastern European system before leaving office in January.

Not exactly what I wanted to read while drinking my morning tea.

By and large (and to my surprise), the Obama administration's foreign policy has been much like the previous administration's foreign policy – and I've been supportive of it.

This is a major departure.  With this move and other wimpy responses to Iran's belligerance, we've practically been begging them to make aggressive moves in both the Middle East and in Europe.  Once their nuclear capability is verified, I expect Iran to start experimenting with bullying tactics.  There's a long list of potential “first targets”: Turkey, Lebanon, Greece, Cyprus, and of course Israel.

But the really big question is this: how will Israel react to the U.S. visibly morphing into a laughable wimp in Iran's perception?  Will they unilaterally attack Iran?  My bet would be “yes”...

He's Right, But...

Jonathan Hunt is a reporter for Fox News. Mosab Hassan Yousef (at right) is the son of an imprisoned Hamas leader. Yousef has renounced Islam, converted to Christianity, and is currently living in the San Diego area. He agreed to be interviewed by Fox News, and the whole thing is well worth reading. This quote jumped out at me:

JONATHAN HUNT: Do you believe that Israel can ever strike a peace deal with Hamas?

MOSAB HASSAN YOUSEF: There is no chance. Is there any chance for fire to co-exist with the water? There is no chance. Hamas can play politics for 10 years, 15 years; but ask any one of Hamas' leaders, 'Okay, what's going to happen after that? Are you just going to live and co-exist with Israel forever?' The answer is going to be no ... unless they want to do something against the Koran. But it's their ideology and they can't just say 'We're not going to do it.' So there is no chance. It's not about Israel, it's not about Hamas: it's about both ideologies. There is no chance.

Yousef is a well-informed Palestinian who says the same thing on this topic that large numbers of Palestinians say. Michael Totten's reports from the area have been most informative on this subject; it's clear that this sentiment is the norm amongst Palestians (and also much more widely, amongst the Muslim world). But Yousef is on the mainstream media, and those other Palestinians are not – so it's interesting to see this notion in the light.

This is the issue that Israel has been living with since the day they were founded, just over 60 years ago. They are completely surrounded by an implacable enemy who openly declares their objective: to wipe Israel off the map, to kill all the Jews.

Yousef is right. There will be no lasting “peace deal” with Hamas, Fatah, or any other organization of Palesistians.

But that is not the same thing as saying there can be no peace. The world has learned this lesson so very many times, and yet still many reject it. Consider: on January 3, 1941 there was no peace deal to be had with the Emperor of Japan, or with Adolf Hitler. And yet now we are at peace with their nations – even more, we count them amongst our close allies. How did this happen? Did we have discussions? Did the U.N. issue an edict? Did we make “proportionate” military responses to their attacks? Did the Secretary of State send a strongly worded letter?

Of course not. We defeated these countries militarily. We used politically sanctioned violence to forcibly take away their ability to harm us. We fought a war in which millions of civilians were killed, along with tens of thousands of American soldiers. We fought with resolve and desperation and a level of violence nearly unimaginable today.

I believe this is the only way to peace in the Middle East – one side must defeat the other, utterly and overwhelmingly. This may well involve large numbers of civilian casualties. But only then will we have peace in the Middle East.

Personally, I'm rooting for the Israelis. I hope they have the balls to finish the job in Gaza – that would make a great start...

Israel vs. Hamas...

In the few days since the Israelis commenced their latest attacks on Hamas in the Gaza strip, the media has (as is totally usual and expected) been filled with heavily-spun, pro-Palestinian propaganda. To hear these “journalists” reports, you'd think that the Israelis were some sort of neo-Nazi organization bent on a twisted effort to wipe out Palestinians. I often wonder how these reporters would feel if those Hamas rockets were raining down on their homes and families. I wonder what sort of response they'd think was appropriate in that case?

I don't expect to personally unravel the craziness of Middle East politics. All by themselves, the Israelis have managed to create one of the screwiest democracies around. Reading about their internal politics is enough to make me feel thankful we have the Congress we do, Reid, Franks, Kennedy, Dodd, and Pelosi included...

But watching the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) in action fills me with the same sense of awe and even pride that I get when watching our own forces in action. The IDF is doing a bang-up publicity job – on the Internet, since for the main part they can't get the world's press to pay any attention to them. Below is one example of their precision weapons in action, and here there are lots more.


The left-leaning media spins the Israeli attacks as reckless, with great civilian cost (and somehow they always neglect to compare this with Hamas, who is deliberately targeting Israeli civilians). In fact, the IDF has been remarkably successful at hitting exactly those targets they set out to hit, with very light civilian casualties – especially when you consider that Hamas deliberately locates their facilities in densely populated areas, knowing that Israel is loath to cause unnecessary civilian casualties (and once again, the left-leaning media consistently fails to point this out in their stories).

Arab Culture

Anyone familiar with the history of the Middle East can't help but make this politically-incorrect observation: any Arab military engagement with a non-Arab military is nearly certain to result in the Arabs losing. The Israeli-Arab conflicts are legendary and consistent with this observation, but they are certainly not the only such conflicts. Most recently, of course, Western coalitions have twice demolished the Iraqi military; in both cases the Arab Iraqi military suffered defeats that would have been unthinkable (and unforgivable) in any other military.

What's behind this pattern?

StrategyPage (which is full of all sorts of interesting articles) recently posted a column on exactly this issue. Here's a sample:

At lot has been written about why Arab armies so consistently lose wars with non-Arabs. These reasons also explain why Arab nations, and many other Third World nations as well, also have trouble establishing democratic governments or prosperous economies. A lot of it has to do with culture, especially culture influenced by Islam. Some of the reasons for these failures are:

Most Arab countries are a patchwork of different tribes and groups, and Arab leaders survive by playing one group off against another. Loyalty is to one's group, not the nation. Most countries are dominated by a single group that is usually a minority (Bedouins in Jordan, Alawites in Syria, Sunnis in Iraq, Nejdis in Saudi Arabia). All of which means that officers are assigned not by merit but by loyalty and tribal affiliation.

Islamic schools favor rote memorization, especially of scripture. Most Islamic scholars are hostile to the concept of interpreting the Koran (considered the word of God as given to His prophet Mohammed). This has resulted in looking down on Western troops that will look something up that they don't know. Arabs prefer to fake it, and pretend it's all in their head. Improvisation and innovation is generally discouraged. Arab armies go by the book, Western armies rewrite the book and thus usually win.

There's much more food for thought in this interesting article. While it's not mentioned directly in the article, it's easy to extrapolate from its points that the al Qaeda organization seems almost designed to take advantage of those same Arab traits that make their conventional military forces so ineffective...

Not mentioned in this column, though widely documented elsewhere, is the pervasive corruption in every Arab culture. Commanding bribes and handing out favors are typically considered by Arabs to be natural (and rightful) perquisites of any office. The traits outlined in this post, plus the universal corruption, make enormous challenges for establishing a democracy.

I've noticed that Arabs who have close contact with the West (and most especially those who travel or live in the West) have no trouble understanding Western ideals. Some see the Western ideals as opportunity to be exploited; others (and more than a few) see them as something their cultures would benefit from. The latter viewpoint is loudly expressed on some of the most popular English-language Arab blogs, which gives me much hope for their future. I've read in many places (most especially Michael Yon and Michael Totten) how the Iraqis are watching and learning from Americans – they are most impressed by how much the Americans have been able to accomplish in such a short time, and also by the opportunities that ordinary Americans have. They'd like all that for themselves, of course.

The Iraqi experiment with democracy is (for me, at least) the single most hopeful development in the Middle East ever – and the only one with any hope whatsoever for lasting peace in the region. Some of my readers, I know, won't understand what I'm talking about there – what on earth does Iraq have to do with Israel? It's a big-picture thought, but here's a simplified version: if there is even a single successful, flourishing Arab democracy, there will enormous pressure on the tyrannical regimes (that would be all the other ones) to similarly reform – the example of a successful Iraq will be very difficult to ignore. And Iraq should be able to succeed – it has far more natural resources than Israel, it has a well-educated populace. The only significant obstacles are terrorism and culture, and terrorism is relatively low right now and declining rapidly. I believe the cultural issues are about to become the single major obstacle to the success of Iraqi democracy.

I'd sure like to see this democratic experiment continue. Obama's rhetoric (assuming he actually means what he's saying, which is by no means certain in an election campaign) makes it clear that he'd yank virtually all significant support from the Iraqis – and that would make it virtually certain that it would descend back into tyranny. What form that would take, I don't know; my intuition says we'd get an autonomous Kurdish region up north, and a terrible war between the Shiites and the Sunni, quite possibly involving Iran (on the side of the Shiites) and Saudi Arabia (on the side of the Sunnis). The only certainty is that it would be awful...

MEMRI

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an indispensable source of information for Americans about the Middle East. They do something our lamestream media rarely does: they take the news reported by Middle Eastern mainstream media, translate it (if required) into English, and then post it raw and unedited. I don't know any other source that routinely provides a peek into the way Middle Easterners get their news. Their main site updates the stories they've processed each day, and their video site has the original Middle Eastern videos, with English transcripts of them. They even have a blog!

What provoked me to post about MEMRI was a transcript I read this morning. It is from the Saudi Iqra TV (a Saudi Arabian media outlet), and shows a man-in-the-street interview with various answers to a single question:

Interviewer: Would you, as a human being, be willing to shake hands with a Jew?

Interviewee 1: Of course I wouldn't be willing to shake hands with a Jew, for religious reasons and because of what is happening now in Palestine, and for many reasons that don't allow me to shake a Jew's hand.

Interviewee 2: No. Because the Jews are eternal enemies. The murderous Jews violate all agreements. I can't shake hands with someone who I know is full of hatred towards me.

Interviewee 3: No, the Jew is an enemy. How can I shake my enemy's hand?

Interviewer: Would you refuse to shake hands with a Jew?

Interviewee 4: Of course, so I wouldn't have to consider amputating my hand afterwards.

Interviewer: If a child asks you who "who are the Jews," what would you answer?

Interviewee 5: The enemies of Allah and His Prophet.

Interviewee 6: The Jew is the occupier of our lands.

Interviewee 1: The murderers of prophets. Our eternal enemies, of course.

Interviewee 2: The murderers of prophets, that's it.

Interviewer: If a child asks you who "who are the Jews," what would you answer?

Interviewee 8: Allah's wrath is upon them, as the Koran says. Allah's wrath is upon them and they all stray from the path of righteousness. They are the filthiest people on the face of this earth because they care only about themselves: Not the Christians, not the Muslims, nor any other religion.

The solution is clear, not only to me but to everyone. If only [the Muslims] declared Jihad, we would see who stays home. We have a few countries… there is one country with a population of over 60-70 million people. If we let them only march, with no weapons even, they would completely trample the Jews, they would turn them into rotten carcasses under their feet. There is another country that donated money, saying, "I am behind you, I'll support you with weapons, just wage [Jihad]."

But the cowardice inside us, deep within our hearts was instilled by the Arab leaders, may Allah forgive them. They breast-fed us with it from the day we were born to this very day it has grown with us.

In Saudi Arabia, as in many other despotic Middle Eastern regimes, decades of non-stop propaganda has produced a populace that apparently really believes this sort of rubbish. The regimes support the propaganda because it provides a target for their population's discontent -- a target other than themselves, that is.

I can't imagine how this sort of thing can be reversed other than by stopping the propaganda, letting real information flow freely, and letting a few decades go by. But so long as those regimes remain in power, the first two prerequisites just ain't gonna happen.

This is one of the main reasons for my support of the war in Iraq -- a democracy in the Middle East was (and remains) the best hope I can think of for addressing what I can only call the brainwashing of the Arab "street".

Now I think I"ll go take a shower; I feel unclean after reading that transcript...

Hamas and Iran

In this morning’s Jerusalem Post is this story and its lead:

Mofaz: Hamas consulting with Iran how to lead PA

Hamas has asked for guidance, instructions and financial assistance from Iran as it prepares to take over the Palestinian Authority, [Israeli] Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz told the European Union’s foreign policy chief Javier Solana on Friday.

Now we really shouldn’t be surprised by this — Iran has a long history of assisting Hamas. But I am dismayed by it nonetheless. It looks like the first moves toward making Palestine a wholly-owned subsidiary of Iran. An Iranian colony, so to speak. Or even an Iranian “state”.

Iran, the country who has repeatedly vowed to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Yup, that ought to help the peace process along all right…

If you’re not familiar with the Hamas/Iran connection, I’ve collected some reading material for you. I particularly recommend this paper [web] [pdf] by Matthew Levitt (a former FBI counterterrorism intelligence analyst). A sample:

According to press reports, moderate Palestinian parents find it increasingly difficult to shelter their children from Hamas recruiters seeking to breed future suicide bombers. One mother recounted how her son’s behavior changed when he started going to the mosque regularly:

At first I thought it was normal when my son Muhammad, who is eighteen, started going to the mosque frequently. But when I found out he was watching films about suicide attacks, I was worried … My son was going to the mosque late at night and early in the morning, adding to our fears … His behavior changed. He became introverted, which made his father and me search his room and spy on his comings and goings … We even locked the door to stop him going out … We later found out that those in charge of the mosque are members of Hamas, which teaches children about jihad and shows them documentaries about suicide bombings.

The father of fifteen-year-old Hamas recruit Musa Ziadah told a similar tale. Originally pleased with his son’s growing faith, the father did not realize Hamas had begun radicalizing his son when the boy was just ten years old and sweeping the mosque floors. Musa would later tell reporters that Hamas “taught me about the heroes of Islam who were killed as saints and how they are now in heaven beside God … I also learned that the Jews have no right to exist on this land, which belongs to Muslims.”

This paper is very well researched and cites numerous other papers publications (many with links). In addition, these two web sites (here and here) have lots of additional and useful background on Hamas and their relationship with Iran.

I worry that with Hamas now in power, and with the new-found aggressiveness that Iran is displaying, we’re going to see even more outrageous terrorist actions by Hamas against Israel — better funded, and using more sophisticated armaments openly imported from Iran. The only effective counter (at least, at the moment) is the Israeli military. Certainly none of the Middle East “peace efforts” have brought any relief from the terrorists; in fact, the continuous concessions wrung from the Israelis looks to Hamas (and Iran) like their enemy is weakening and is now more vulnerable than ever. In other words, the peace initiatives were actually counter-productive (just like the appeasement of Hitler before WWII) — not that anybody will learn from that, I’m sure.

Unsettling news for this otherwise fine Friday morning…

Hamas

As you most likely know, in the recent Palestinian elections the Islamic Resistance Movement — more commonly known as “Hamas” — won a resounding victory. They now hold a majority of the seats in the Palestinian Authority Legislative Council, effectively giving them control of the government. The folks at MEMRI (an absolutely essential resource on the Middle East) have translated the covenant of Hamas into English — the document that defines their beliefs, strategies, and policies. It is a chilling document, which I’ve reproduced a sample of below. But you really should go read the whole thing, to gain a appreciation of what we’re up against with radical Islamic fundamentalists…

From MEMRI’s English translation of the Covenant of Hamas:

Peaceful Solutions, Initiatives and International Conferences

Article Thirteen

The initiatives, the so-called peace solutions, and the international conferences for resolving the Palestinian problem stand in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement, for to neglect any part of Palestine is to neglect part of the Islamic faith. The nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its [Islamic] faith. It is in the light of this principle that its members are educated, and they wage jihad in order to raise the banner of Allah over the homeland.

"And Allah has full control over His affairs; but most people do not know.” (Koran, 12:21)

From time to time there are calls to hold an international conference in order to seek a solution for the [Palestinian] problem. Some accept this [proposal] and some reject it, for one reason or another, demanding the fulfillment of some condition or conditions before they agree to hold the conference and participate in it. However, the Islamic Resistance Movement - since it is familiar with the parties participating in the conference and with their past and current positions on the issues of the Muslims - does not believe that these conferences can meet the demands or restore the rights [of the Palestinians], or bring equity to the oppressed. These conferences are nothing but a way to give the infidels power of arbitration over Muslim land, and when have the infidels ever been equitable towards the believers?

"The Jews will never be content with you, nor will the Christians, until you follow their religion. Say: 'The guidance of Allah is the right guidance.' But if you follow their desires after the knowledge which has come to you, then you shall have no protector or guardian from Allah.” (Koran, 2:120)

There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are a waste of time and a farce. The Palestinian people is far too eminent to have its future, its rights and its destiny toyed with. As stated in the Hadith: “The people of Al-Sha’m are [Allah’s] rod in His land. Through them, He wreaks vengeance on whomever He wishes among His servants. The hypocrites among them are not allowed to be superior to the believers among them, and they shall die in grief and distress.” (Recorded by Al-Tabarani with a chain of transmitters to Muhammad, and by Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal] with an incomplete chain of transmitters to Muhammad which may be the accurate record, the transmitters in both cases being trustworthy - Allah alone is omniscient).

In other words, Hamas' official position is that all this talk of peace initiatives, reconciliation, and co-existence is just a bunch of Jewish/Christian crap — the only answer is jihad, until the infidels are all gone or dead.

(from Webster’s)

Jihad \Ji*had"\, Jehad \Je*had"\, n. [Ar. jih[=a]d.] (Moham.)

A religious war against infidels or Mohammedan heretics; also, any bitter war or crusade for a principle or belief.

Their courage in war … had not, like that of the Mohammedan dervishes of the Sudan, or of Mohammedans anywhere engaged in a jehad, a religious motive and the promise of future bliss behind it. — James Bryce

Good News

This is the only good news Michael Totten could find in Egypt. It came in an exchange with Egyptian blogger Big Pharaoh, who was showing him around Cairo:

“Can we talk about politics out in the open?” I said.

“Yes,” he said. “We can say whatever we want.”

“Is it because we’re speaking in English?”

“No,” he said. “We could do it in Arabic, too.”

“You’re not worried about the secret police?”

“Not any more,” he said. “It is a real change from last year. Last year there was no way. But it’s better now, more open. Do you know why?”

“No,” I said. “Tell me.”

“Because of pressure from George W. Bush.”

That is the only piece of good news I have to report from Egypt.

The rest of Michael’s excellent post is a litany of the many political problems and challenges Egypt faces. It’s sad, and (despite the above) not particularly optimistic. When I finished reading it, I felt very sad for the Big Pharaoh, who seems to be torn between wanting to help Egypt become a modern secular society and escaping to America (or Canada, his second choice apparently only because it would make it easy for him to visit America. There’s some interesting discussion, with some local insight, on the situation in Iran as well. Though sad, it’s an insightful piece and well worth reading…