Oh, Israel

I think the most recent Gaza-Israel violence is depressing and abhorrent. However, this is not terribly surprising, as I think all the Palestinian-Israeli violence has been depressing and abhorrent. Heck, I'll go so far as to say the Kashmir conflict is depressing and abhorrent, seriously, India, Pakistan, it sounds like a very nice valley, but no sweater is worth all this bloodshed. Actually, perhaps even more abhorrent is some of the stuff that goes on in sub-Saharan Africa, fortunately this doesn't make the news as much, since it would be even more depressing. In summation, I find violence as a problem solving technique depressing and abhorrent.

So, why am I picking on Israel? Well, partially, as I alluded to above, it gets a lot of media exposure. Which is probably a good thing, since Amercans, we are killing Palestinians. Do not mistake me, I think both sides are behaving incredibly poorly; I cannot help but feel sorry for the Palestinians, who suddenly found a new nation of Israel right in the middle of what they used to call by the quaint term "home." On the other hand, it isn't as though the future Israelis decided to invade the land, at least not initially. Victorious Europeans after World War II decided there should be a Jewish homeland, which made a fair amount of sense in the contingent context, and decided the Middle East, being the beacon of stability and mature conflict resolution that it was, was the logical place to put it... In hindsight, that might be where they went wrong, is it too late to cede New Jersey and establish the homeland there? Or maybe a snippet of Texas, similar climate, more oil, but I was hoping for a history of mature conflict resolution...

Anyway, since the Western Powers basically created Israel whole cloth, they felt a certain amount of obligation to the nation. Mix in some Byzantine Cold War politics, and perhaps just a hint of Islamophobia, and Israel is the largest recipient of foreign US military aid of any country we didn't conquer... I mean... liberate. This would be all fine and dandy if it weren't for the fact that Israel tends to use that military aid to do unconscionable things to the Palestinians, who, to be far, are doing unconscionable things to the Israelis, and probably would do more without this aid. So, by giving them this aid we are basically saying we would rather bad things happen to Palestinians than Israelis, and while I am perfectly ok with Israelis preferring bad things to happen to Palestinians than Israelis, I personally have nothing against either group, so I am not a fan of picking sides. Why can't Israel be more like Poland, they hardly ever use their military aid to go out and beat the snot out of people groups with less military? Then again, that might be why they get so little military aid.

This post has been leavened by a fair amount of humor, please know that this is because I think that what is going on is too horrible to take entirely seriously, and must therefore be accompanied with some levity so that we can continue to consider it. Personally, I think the US should stop sending weapons abroad, given our stellar track record of supporting some of the most violent sociopaths around, even ignoring the frequency with which these same people come back and launch attacks against US interests. Why is it that the people who ask for mass quantities of weapons so often turn out to be violent sociopaths? But we should definitely reconsider our aid to Israel, helping to perpetuate a cycle of misery and oppression that, ultimately, is extremely damaging to both sides in the conflict. I don't think that this is a solution, and I don't think that by simply stopping supplying weapons to a conflict we very much helped create we can turn away and wipe the blood from our own hands, but I do believe that the only solution is to be found through negotiation, and as long as Israel has such a position of military superiority I don't see why they would desire to come to a negotiation table that is likely to require great compromises from both sides.

Osama bin Laden

‎"I mourn the loss of thousands of precious lives, but I will not rejoice in the death of one, not even an enemy." -MLK (but not the famous one, it seems doubtful that the civil rights leader said this, but I attribute it to him as most people are doing, after all, it could be someone else with the same name)

"The world should celebrate when an evil man sees the error in his ways, not when he's killed while proud of what he's done." - Tyler Oakley (I don't know who he is yet, but I like this quote)

I wanted to put up a post with my reaction to the news that bin Laden is dead yesterday, but I was shoulder deep in a paper, in which I quoted bin Laden coincidently enough, so I do so now. Following initial enthusiasm over the death of bin Laden, and who can blame us for feeling excitement upon completion of a goal after almost 10 years in the pursuit, most of the responses shifted in tenor to something along the lines of the two quotes above. While the world might be less bad with bin Laden no longer out there, I fail to see how the death of anyone can make the world a better place, as death just removes things from the world, creating nothing.

However, in the space opened up by this removal, I hope that we can create some things. I hope that we can create better, more equitable and supportive, relationships with nations in the Middle East, especially those fledgling nations which recently voiced their freedom from decades of dictatorship in Tunisia, Egypt, and, hopefully, Libya. I hope that we can create a more free society, rolling back some of police powers we have granted the state in wake of the terrorist scare, and restoring sanity to the airport screening process. I hope our troops come home finally! And I hope that we can create a better future wherein people of all religions or none can coexist in greater peace and with deeper understanding.

There has been some talk that justice has been served, but I cannot see justice in this action. not that I am saying that it is unjust, simply that in the unveiled face of human tragedy that we saw on September 11th I cannot see any way to restore justice to such a thing. What cold comfort is justice to the gaping hole in the New York skyline and American hearts? If some who have lost loved ones in the attack or the resulting wars find some solace in bin Laden's death, I would certainly not begrudge them of it, but I feel no more whole than before bin Laden died.

Are we safer? I don't know. Is al-Qaeda's second in command more capable than bin Laden? Will the threat of American retribution deter more would-be terrorists than further American meddling in Muslim nations creates? Does it matter? Life is fragile no matter how you cut it, and no matter what precautions we take, we cannot prevent every threat to our lives.

Am I glad bin Laden is dead? I guess a little. Not so much because it is an ending, but because it could be the beginning of something better. Because it is hard to hate someone who is dead. And because I have hope.

The US and the Middle East

For those of you living under a rock, revolutionary fervor is sweeping through the Middle East. Those of you living under Iraq probably already know this. First in Tunisia, then in Egypt, and now, perhaps, in Libya, dictatorial regimes are being thrown out of power. I have been silent on this subject thus far because, a) I know little about the region, b) I have quite a few other ideas for things to talk about, and c) I have been seriously busy.

However, on the subject of US policy regarding the revolutions, I have some thoughts to share. My strongest opinion is that we have no business interfering in these revolutions! If we want to swat down planes bombing their own citizens on humanitarian grounds, I have no issue in that, but I do not believe we should play an active role in determining the agendas or policies of the post-revolutionary governments.

Due to our demonstrated interest in the region's oil and our longstanding policy of meddling in the politics of the Middle East, often to the disadvantage of large portions of its citizenry, we have neither the moral authority nor the local trust needed to be good mediators in this conflict. Were we to intervene on the behalf of the revolutionaries, it would probably be in return for "considerations" from the eventual government, and even if it were not, it would likely still appear as though that were our motivation, casting a pall of suspicion onto the new government. So, other than expressing our support for the people and protecting them from the worst atrocities, I feel that we have no direct role in this conflict or the reconstruction that will follow afterward. Too bad, after so many tries, we are probably getting fairly good at installing puppet popular regimes.

Even if we had the moral authority to intervene, it would probably be best that we did not. Freedom, and even more so democracy, require lasting commitment and effort on the part of the people. If the people of the region obtain them on their own, hopefully they shall appreciate the value all the more, and be willing to cultivate them as is necessary.

This is not to say that we cannot support the revolutionaries. Our very mission as a nation requires that we admire their desire to overthrow dictators and, if we wish to remain decent human beings, we must by our nature condemn the human rights abuses occurring in Libya, which, thankfully, were mostly absent in Egypt and Tunisia. If our foreign policy focuses more on extorting human rights and open governments out of repressive regimes, rather than oil rights and open markets, then I believe the US will be a nation which finally represents something worthwhile.