When Hamas joins the discussion, you might just have a quorum
BARNETT
¦"Hamas May Give Peace a Chance: After Arafat's death, it's Gaza vs. the West Bank," op-ed by Scott Atran, New York Times, 18 December 2004, p. A35.
Now it seems that even Hamas is coming out for moderate candidate Mahmoud Abbas, overtly working to discredit his rivals. Indications are, according to this op-ed, that a split is emerging within Hamas regarding tactics, with the West Bank crowd seeing their chance while the Gaza fanatics want to fight on. As Sheikh Hassan Yusef, the top Hamas leader in the Bank recently stated, "We have to find an exit. We need a dialogue of civilizations, not a clash of civilizations."
The number of potential spoilers is dwindling by the day, leaving only the toughest nuts yet to crack. Is the Bush Administration ready for this historic opportunity? Is it ready to deal? Or are we going to see the same lack of imagination that got us the totally snafu-ed occupation in Iraq?
Posted by Thomas P.M. Barnett at 10:04 PM
The hype on food security
¦"Think Globally, Eat Locally: How to protect food from bioterrorism," op-ed by Jennifer Wilkins, New York Times, 18 December 2004, p. A35.
My Mom can drive me nuts politically sometimes, but one thing she is always good for is spotting a "horse's ass" a mile away. Her take on Tommy Thompson as governor of Wisconsin was always just that: big blowhard who specialized in leaving messes for somebody else's watch.
Thompson's time at HHS was what you expect of him: lotsa press conferences full of sound and fury and signifying basically nothing, plus a record of achievements that will be debated if it's ever located. On his way out the door, he spouts some nonsense about how our food supply is super at risk for terrorist attack. Why? Because we don't check everything at every point in the process, so—shazam!—it must be totally at risk because . . . I dunno . . . look at the disastrous record we've had up to now in terms of bad food outbreaks, mass deaths from them, and . . .what the hell were we talking about again?
The food fear-mongering post-9/11 is one of the weirdest aspects yet of the reign of terror that is the army of self-appointed security experts that now besiege America on a daily basis regarding various sky-is-falling scenarios. I know, I know, it's all so much EASIER to pull off than anyone realizes!.
So here, in this op-ed, we finally get some answers about "how to protect food from bioterrorism." This lady's brilliant answer:
The solution to these insecurities is to establish community-based food systems that include many small farmers and a diversity of products.
My God, Willie Nelson and Farm-Aid would be proud. Let's return to 19th-century agricultural patterns across America just in case al Qaeda might strike. Sure, let's just reverse engineer our entire society on this one, because we just never know!
You know, when Mao planned his Great Leap Backward, his dream was to create a little iron smelting furnace in every peasant's back yard, lest poor China be held hostage to the industrialized West. Now, in response to the 7th-century types running global jihad against Westoxification, we should emulate Mao's dictum by returning to our agrarian roots. Victory gardens? Hell, entire Victory Farms!
This is beyond stupid. But somehow it's what the editors of the NYT op-ed page think we need to know.
We have officially reached the Idiotic Age in this Global War on Terrorism.
Thompson left too early. He was perfectly cast for this sort of role.
Posted by Thomas P.M. Barnett at 10:04 PM
UN peacekeeping: not exactly the professionals needed for the Gap
¦"In Congo War, Even Peacekeepers Add to Horror: Soldiers Used Money and Treats as Lures, Rape Victims Say," by Marc Lacey, New York Times, 18 December 2004, p. A1.
The UN's record on the Congo has always been so bad, so pathetic, so irrelevant, such a complete waste of time, that I have long thought nothing could possibly come down the pike to make it seem worse.
That something has arrived in the form of the UN's own internal auditing process uncovering the systematic sexual abuse of women by peacekeepers operating there over the past several years. Apparently, the blue helmets came on the scene, noticed the usual tricks of the trade being conducted there, and then simply joined in the party.
How often? Unicef says it's treated 2,000 victims of sexual abuse in the Bunia region in recent months, and that many of them involve peacekeepers. The UN itself owns up to at least 150 incidences involving their troops—so far.
No, Kofi shouldn't resign just because his kid takes bribes, nor for this either. He's such an incompetent symbol of such an incompetent system that both he and his well-deserved Nobel should be on display for as long as possible—if nothing else than as a reminder for how low this organization has fallen in the realm of security, which, BTW, was the entire raison d'etre for its creation following WWII.
China looking to codify its rule-set on Taiwan
¦"China's Army May Respond If Taiwan Fully Secedes: A legislative tactic hints again at military action by Beijing," by Joseph Kahn, New York Times, 18 December 2004, p. A7.
This is real news alright. China's legislature "indicates" that it is "preparing" a "law" that will "possibly mandate" a military action "if" Taiwan "were to declare independence."
Check out this bold reporting even in the title: may, if, fully, tactic, hints, again.
Hu Jintao is making clear that the mainland is prepared to go through with its threat to militarily threaten Taiwan if the latter goes out of its way to signal that it will never allow reunification with China. Note that that's not a threat to invade Taiwan if it does nothing to change the status quo.
So if Taiwan never pisses China off unduly, nothing happens—and now China is threatening to make that notion a "law" on its books. Wow. That is news, because it's such a vast change from the last three decades of hints, maybes, and indications.
Tell me which side America really needs to keep an eye on in this situation.
Ah, but if I don't hype this scenario as any analyst worth his salt does (a great naval phrase, if ever there was one), then how can I possibly continue working for the Department of Navy?
Posted by Thomas P.M. Barnett |
