Browsing the news I came across the photo of an officer who had been recently killed in Iraq. I can’t take my eyes of this photo, as it seems to represent so much about our country; dignity, honor, and progress:
It also reminded me of something I talked about today in one my classes, a famous regiment of black soldiers from Massachusetts who fought in the American Civil War. Click on the photo below to read about them:
Here is an article by Jeff Jacoby, a conservative who writes for The Boston Globe.
-> Click Here!
I have recently finished reading two eye-opening books.
The first, “Ransom of the Jews,” by Radu Ioinad, was a gift from Vermilion Dreams – thanks! This fascinating books traces the phenomenon of the movement of Romania’s Jews, post-War, to Israel. Although Romania was guilty of the extermination of over a quarter million Jews during the War, its “switching sides” tactic meant that many did end up surviving. However, upon return to their cities and towns, they quickly realized that a better life awaited them elsewhere. Although an initial group received permission to emigrate to Palestine, as the exodus continued, the Romanian Government decided to profit from it.
Since the newly formed State of Israel wanted to ensure that all Jews had the opportunity to make Aliyah, and the majority of the Romanian Jews were of Orthodox background, the Romanians put pressure on the Israeli government to provide something in return for these individuals. In the beginning, this transfer was done by third party intermediaries. Schemes involved briefcases full of cash, stagings in 3rd countries, and other such covert acts. Israel also developed modern poultry farms for the Romanian state. The tale continues as Romania’s infamous dictator, Nicolae Ceausescu, comes to power. Desperate for more cash, he continually upps the price for the remaining Jews. At one point a tier system is established; university educated Jews would sell for the most, followed by those with a basic education, and lastly the old and very young. The idea was that the Romanian state simply wanted to be paid for educational services already rendered.
Of course all of this was cloaked under fancy rhetoric, and in official documents, the entire program was referred to as a means of “re-uniting” families. The book details closely the sporadic nature of this exodus, showing how, for insance, in one year a few thousand left whereas in the next only a few hundred. The author also looks into the mindset of key Israeli agents who facilitated this process and the moral dilemma they faced. A keen insight into the Romanian psyche, this book is damning; indeed, the author mentions that the Romanian government has since apologized to the Germans regarding a similar scheme with the Saxons of Transylvania, but has yet to formally apologize to the Israeli government. This book is a must read because all too often, the Holocaust is seen as the end of European Jewry, while in fact, for those who survived, the following years were too a great ordeal.
Moving along, a book I had been waiting to get my hands on for quite a while, “Murder in Samarkand,” by Craig Murray. Mr. Murray was the British Ambassador to Uzbekistan from 2002 – 2004. A lifelong FCO servant (Foreign and Commonwealth Office) he received his post at a very crucial time for the West. Given the 9/11 event, Bush had begun his crusade against terror, and found the United Kingdom to be a steadfast ally. Another perhaps lesser known ally in the “The War Against Terror,” (or TWAT,) was the country of Uzbekistan, or more precisely, Islam Karimov, the post-Soviet republic’s dictator.
Given its Soviet history, human rights had never been a strong suite of the Uzbeks, but following independence (or dissolution,) the nature of the repression changed, becoming even more brutal. Since the United States was, at this stage, gung-ho about toppling the Taliban in Afghanistan, Bush looked to Uzbekistan, Afghanistan’s northern neighbor, as a crucial staging area for US Military might. Thus a deal was forged between “Coalition” (US/UK) forces and the Uzbeks. Out of this the US received access to a giant military compound in the south of the country and intelligence gathered by the Uzbek security services. The Uzbeks, of course, received financial incentives and global nods from the US.
Before this partnership, Uzbekistan had reached a point of no return regarding economic/political life. Since independence, the Uzbeks found that their standard of living had been on a constant decline. Whereas in the Soviet times many were able to travel throughout the Union, restrictions on personal movement had become draconian, making travel even within the country a nightmare necessitating multiple bribes. Furthermore, instead of encouraging small businesses, the corrupt politburo had taken many moves to intimidate and discourage this. As a result, many Uzbeks were upset at their country, and there emerged two strains of protest. The first sought economic and social liberalization whereas the second was based on Islamist desires. Needless to say, the latter movement was much smaller than the first, but was used as cover for any and all dissidents. Therefore, charges of “attempting to undermine the homeland,†abounded, complete with the Soviet style detentions, forced confessions, and harsh punishments. The Uzbek government had been operating under this cycle for many years.
After Bush enlisted Karimov in TWAT, the scale of this repression increased tremendously; intelligence (purportedly regarding al-Qaeda) obtained by the Uzbek security services was passed to the US, and subsequently became part of the UK’s lexicon. This is where Craig Murray enters. An unconventional person to begin with, he approached his ambassadorship actively. Whereas the previous ambassadors had not interacted much with the British community in the country, Murray made it his first priority to visit businesses and NGOs. Through these travels, he learned of the extent of Uzbek brutality, and became horrified that his superiors were keeping mum about this. He believed that it was not only morally corrupt but also useless to be accepting torture-induced intelligence provided by Uzbeks.
The book details his travels around the country, including some devastatingly stark visits to families that had been subject to the Uzbek security service’s brutal violence. Breaking with the other ambassadors (namely the US,) who wished to focus on positive changes (which were largely born of fabricated statistics,) Murray decided to speak out against the regime. He did so on numerous occasions, and on a level far more blunt than that which is used in the usual diplomatic discourse. Although this did make him enemies in the upper reaches of the Uzbek government, his outgoing style won him key allies both in the British and Uzbek communities. As such, he became a figurehead to many Uzbeks, and was able to capture the attention of an otherwise recalcitrant administration. His luck with his British superiors was, however, less impressive. As a result, they set out to discredit him based on minor personal things, such as his proclivity to drink and good cheer (he was, after all, a Scott.)
This is a fascinating tale particularly because Murray does not come off as a hero, rather a normal guy, vices included, who could not keep quiet in the face of what he found to be reprehensible actions done on behalf of his government. And whereas many of us feel this way these days, as an Ambassador, his audience was huge. Murray eventually goes down, but not without one hell of a fight. The book is not only a personal account, but also a rumination on the state of world affairs. Murray spares no criticism of those who chose to ally with and support brutal dictators in the name of promoting global freedom. Written with immense wit and sincerity, this is a book not to be missed, though I fear it will be overlooked in this day of shouting idiots.
I am thrilled by the defeat of Joe Lieberman in CT.
Although Ned Lamont is himself a millionare, he spoke honestly and with conviction.
Ousting Lieberman does not mean that Democrats are weak on terror.
Right-wingers will claim that the Democratic party is being taken over by radicals… answer, mirror.
Wanting out of Iraq is not “anti-American” or “pro-terrorist.” Wanting a sane foreign policy is in the best interests of this country.
And Joe, you lost, go home!
I’ve been paying close attention to the events in Israel and find myself conflicted. Personally, I do not advocate violence, however, I am not so naive to believe that it is completely unnecessary. That said, the Jewish state finds itself under attack from a radical ideology which seeks no less than its utter destruction. When faced with an enemy who seeks to annihilate you, I see no problem with retaliation. However, the very nature of the enemy ensures that such defensive actions will lead to civilian casualties. Indeed, the radicals (Hezbollah, Hamas, etc.) operate within the same territory as other civilians. Therefore, when combating strongholds of these terrorist organizations, innocents will be killed. This is not a justification, rather a fact regarding the nature of the battle. Indeed, it seems that even if Israel succeeds in wiping out Hezbollah offices or leaders, the damage done will amount to a net loss. With the death of each innocent, passions in the Muslim world will be further inflamed against not only Israel, but also the US and the West in large. It seems, thus, that Israel’s actions are not prudent.
But to stop the analysis at this point would be incomplete. Although this method of massive retaliation may seem barbaric, so too are the tactics employed by the enemy. And the difficulty here is that, unlike previous global conflicts, this one is even harder to trace to a single source; that is, radical Islamic terrorism, which is the manifestation of the desire for Islam to triumph over all people, is nurtured worldwide. September 11th, the London/Madrid/Bali/etc. bombings all are the “fruits” of this labor. We can expect more.
Unfortunately, it is at this point in the game where types like Bush/Cheney step in, insert the period, while admonishing us to be afraid and to continue supporting their war. Although this is indeed a war, between extremists and a more moderate and pluralistic vision of humanity, our current black/white policies do little to genuinely support our side. Instead, we must blend pragmatism with effective action.
As progressives/liberals we must admit that radical Islam (or Islamo-Fascism) is a real threat. The goal of this movement, as stated before, is world domination in the name of Islam. This idea is not particularly new, nor is it one to which only Islam is prone. The difference is that this specific strain of Islam, which is practiced in many places globally, allows no accommodation for non-believers. To these adherents, Islam is the only true path, and therefore any and all other paths are inferior and to be eliminated. Murder becomes justified, indeed glorified. As far as these people are concerned, the global goal is accomplished through small victories. Since the United States is such a large and formidable military force, it is unlikely that radical Islamists will anytime soon destroy it. However, victories are being won on smaller stages. Just recently, an article in the NY Times described how Sha’ria, or Islamic law, has been adopted in Banda Ache province in Indonesia. Similar victories, outside of the traditional Middle East, signify the success of this de-centralized movement. And just as Americans recruit the best intellectual minds to its Universities, the Islamo-Fascist movement recruits the most gullible/desperate/misinformed/brainwashed to its own training camps. Thus as this army grows, it becomes more internationalized.
Since the destruction of the US is not feasible at present, Israel assumes the brunt of attacks, as witnessed by the endless suicide bombings and rocket fire to which it is subject within its territory. Israel is not the United States. However, to claim that the interests of Israel and the United States do no coincide regarding this issue is pure folly. The hatred of our enemy against the Jews and the West is really one in the same, and though Christians may be larger than the Jews in number, rest assured that you too are unacceptable and will be dealt with. The fate of Israel will largely be the fate of the West, and our ability to combat this enemy globally. Israel may be doing it wrong, but the idea is right. This movement must first be contained, and then eliminated. But this is hard work, and frankly, the traditional notions of combat do not seem to apply. Tanks and fighter planes can only do so much to destroy a perverted ideology. But re-education is not impossible; witness the turnaround of post-Nazi Germany into a multicultural powerhouse.
The real war will involve isolating those who preach hate while assisting those who teach a version of religion that is truly pro-life. But when individuals act out of fear, such nuance is most often lost. With September 11th, we got a taste of that fear, and I fear, like the hawkish Israelis, we are making similar mistakes – namely with Iraq. What we must remember is that radicalism takes hold easily in non-democratic societies. Oppression is the name of the game across much of the Middle East, and thus more moderate voices tend to be silenced. Our task in the upcoming years will be to help build institutions that give such voices a greater audience. This, coupled with the isolation and destruction of those who shamelessly advocate violence, is the real path to victory. The time for action is now, but we must not rush into the battle without some damn good plans. Unfortunately this is not what we have done, and we are now saddled with the additional burden of undoing the damage caused by recent actions. Let’s face up to this threat honestly so that we can truly defeat it.