Revolutions, in all their forms, rarely setup a country to be exactly what the revolutionaries wanted it to be. Take for example how Iran emerged out of its 1979 revolution (theocratic), or how Russia has developed following the "transfer of power" from Vladimir Putin to Dmitry Medvedev (dictatorial). Egypt is no outlier to the post-revolutionary balancing act wherein a country seeks to redefine itself on the international stage and appease the populace who clamored for revolution.
In the West, it is therefore troubling that one of the first trips by Egypt's new President, Mohammed Morsi, is to China and Iran. In China, Morsi will focus on business and development. These are important objectives: China is sought after as an alternative to Western influence throughout the world and Egypt is in dire need of an economic kindling in order to validate the revolution. In Iran, he will attend the meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement. Morsi will not visit the United States until the upcoming United Nations meeting.
This trip scheduling may be just logistics, but it will also be seen as a poor choice in the West (Thomas Friedman in particular doesn't like it). The United States is one of the largest aid donors to Egypt and no friend of Tehran's. At the same time, relations with China remain cool, and could head for a downturn if an incoming American president labels China a currency manipulator. Therefore it is troubling that Morsi chose to visit Tehran in person - which no Egyptian president has done since its 1979 treaty with Israel - rather than send a deputy or via alternative diplomatic means.
Morsi is clearly attempting to solidify a position as a moderate. The question everyone wants to know the answer to is: Is he one? At the same time as his trip abroad began, Morsi, albeit in somewhat vague terms, reaffirmed Egypt's position to the treaty with Israel as well as its terms regarding the Egyptian military's presence in the Sinai. One thing to remember is that eventually, everyone is aligned (even if you are aligned with the non-aligned) and the grass isn't always greener on that other side. It might behoove Mr. Morsi to consider not only where a significant amount of Egyptian aid comes from, but also which countries may most benefit the business, development, and political prospects of Egypt for years to come.
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Coexistence & the Two-State Solution
It can be claimed that Israeli society is as polarized as it has ever been. Critical rifts run through: secular vs. religious, Jewish vs. Muslim, immigrant vs. native, and many others within those labels as well as across them.
Recently, a group of Jewish teenagers beat an Arab teenager to within inches of his life (he has since been released). Unsurprising to many observers, a general lack of enmity toward Arabs by religious Jewish populations may have been an underlying cause. Many Israelis recognize the inevitability of coexistence and the two-state solution - the alternative is all-out war and annihilation. However, some continue to believe that they are participating in a zero-sum game. In reality, the situation is one where both sides can benefit. It is therefore positive to see that Israel ordered its schools to discuss the beating, as well as the feelings that may have fueled it. What would be even more positive would be to see would be for this incident to be labeled, officially speaking, racist and the charges being level with the hate crime category in the United States. The government should take the stance that this kind of activity will not be tolerated in the society that Israel seeks to build.
Recently, a group of Jewish teenagers beat an Arab teenager to within inches of his life (he has since been released). Unsurprising to many observers, a general lack of enmity toward Arabs by religious Jewish populations may have been an underlying cause. Many Israelis recognize the inevitability of coexistence and the two-state solution - the alternative is all-out war and annihilation. However, some continue to believe that they are participating in a zero-sum game. In reality, the situation is one where both sides can benefit. It is therefore positive to see that Israel ordered its schools to discuss the beating, as well as the feelings that may have fueled it. What would be even more positive would be to see would be for this incident to be labeled, officially speaking, racist and the charges being level with the hate crime category in the United States. The government should take the stance that this kind of activity will not be tolerated in the society that Israel seeks to build.
Monday, August 27, 2012
Support Arab Spring by Selling Arms to Existing Regimes?
The United States, supposed proponent of the Arab Spring (unless it is not entirely convenient), sold $66.3 billion in arms abroad last year. Russia was second - at $4.8 billion. $33.4 billion of those arms were sold to Saudi Arabia. That figure alone broke the previous record sales of US arms - $31 billion in 2009. Other notables included Oman and the United Arab Emirates. On the bright side, no major sales to Syria?
Friday, August 17, 2012
Australian Tiger?
Australia is so far away, its business hour window with the United States is only a couple of hours wide. Yet, the country often portrayed as backward (see Crocodile Dundee if you must) has been on a roll, starting with the 2000 Sydney Olympics, and after experiencing a slight dip in the mid-2000s, is once again resurgent.
Australia's banks, rising out of a country of 20-odd million people, have a market value more than all those in the Eurozone. Australia has just a smidge more people than Romania, to put things in perspective. Australia's economy, led by resource exports, has grown steadily, leading to worries of a resource curse taking hold in this developed economy. So far, Australia is weathering all storms. Is Australia the next tiger?
Australia's banks, rising out of a country of 20-odd million people, have a market value more than all those in the Eurozone. Australia has just a smidge more people than Romania, to put things in perspective. Australia's economy, led by resource exports, has grown steadily, leading to worries of a resource curse taking hold in this developed economy. So far, Australia is weathering all storms. Is Australia the next tiger?
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Egypt: The Presidential Shake, Rattle, and Roll
New Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi moved to solidify his power yesterday, dismissing two of the top military leaders and rescinding a June military declaration that had given the military final authority on declaring war and naming generals.
The move was, it seems, coordinated with members of the military, as the two senior military officials who were dismissed will remain on as senior military advisers to Morsi. The move suggests that Morsi has built sufficiently strong ties with at least parts of the Egyptian military apparatus that he felt confident to make such a move. What this all means for the direction of Egyptian military and foreign policy, however, remains to be seen.
The move was, it seems, coordinated with members of the military, as the two senior military officials who were dismissed will remain on as senior military advisers to Morsi. The move suggests that Morsi has built sufficiently strong ties with at least parts of the Egyptian military apparatus that he felt confident to make such a move. What this all means for the direction of Egyptian military and foreign policy, however, remains to be seen.
Monday, August 13, 2012
When do we start helping Israel with the Middle East's dirty work?
In 1981, Israeli planes bombed and destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor just south of Baghdad. The operation was vehemently lambasted by the United Nations. At the same time, many believe that the attack set back a developing nuclear weapons program by at least a decade. This not to say that work on weapons of mass destruction halted entirely after the attack, but that efforts to meet those ends were harmed. Even the expansion of those efforts and their hidden nature did not, it seems, bring Iraq back to where it would have been had the reactor remained.
More than 20 years later, in 2007, Israeli commandos and planes destroyed a nuclear reactor in Syria. Reaction, this time around, was softer with largely silence throughout the Middle East. Reports quickly confirmed that the destroyed facility was an undeclared nuclear reactor with possible military implications.
Come to 2012, and the question of Iranian reactors lingers. Israel has been repeatedly asked to back off and avoid repeating the 1981 and 2007 incidents. It seems though, that patience is wearing thin. For Israel, the question is not of politics, or even military ability; the question is existential. Will the Israelis carry out a third strike on a nuclear reactor in the Middle East in (just about) 30 years?
This time around, the environment is different. Calculations are more complex. The Israeli public is arguably more comfortable with the international environment and more wary of a war with a (relative) neighbor, or at least one with the missile capacity to rock Israeli cities and towns.
The US, the West, and the UN, have tiptoed around the issue of Iranian nuclear development for years. Perhaps it is time we draw a hard line and help our supposed ally, thereby possibly also avoiding an all-out conflict that could drag in other neighbors, including those with fledgling democratic reforms.
More than 20 years later, in 2007, Israeli commandos and planes destroyed a nuclear reactor in Syria. Reaction, this time around, was softer with largely silence throughout the Middle East. Reports quickly confirmed that the destroyed facility was an undeclared nuclear reactor with possible military implications.
Come to 2012, and the question of Iranian reactors lingers. Israel has been repeatedly asked to back off and avoid repeating the 1981 and 2007 incidents. It seems though, that patience is wearing thin. For Israel, the question is not of politics, or even military ability; the question is existential. Will the Israelis carry out a third strike on a nuclear reactor in the Middle East in (just about) 30 years?
This time around, the environment is different. Calculations are more complex. The Israeli public is arguably more comfortable with the international environment and more wary of a war with a (relative) neighbor, or at least one with the missile capacity to rock Israeli cities and towns.
The US, the West, and the UN, have tiptoed around the issue of Iranian nuclear development for years. Perhaps it is time we draw a hard line and help our supposed ally, thereby possibly also avoiding an all-out conflict that could drag in other neighbors, including those with fledgling democratic reforms.
Sunday, August 12, 2012
Civilian Deaths Down In Afghanistan; U.N. Unhappy
Even in a short U.N. press release such as this, there are numerous questions about how to gauge success in Afghanistan or success of counter-terrorism in general. Civilian casualties caused by international and pro-government forces were down 25%, and those forces were responsible for only 10% of all civilian casualties. Anti-government forces, meanwhile, were responsible for 80% of civilian casualties, and their assassinations of pro-government officials, use of IEDs, and attacks on schools, were all on the rise. Overall, civilian casualties were down 15%.
From that data, one could point to numerous successes, including the improved efforts of pro-government forces to minimize civilian casualties. On the other hand, protecting civilians from Taliban and other insurgent attacks -- though extremely difficult -- is a necessary component of any successful counter-terrorist effort. If a government cannot keep its citizens safe, then those citizens will continue to lack faith in that government. The Taliban is likely too embedded into Afghan society to ever be eradicated by military means alone; rather, any lasting peace in the region will almost undoubtedly involve bringing the Taliban to the table. Until then, the war will continue to wind down to a bloody end, if indeed an end is in sight.
From that data, one could point to numerous successes, including the improved efforts of pro-government forces to minimize civilian casualties. On the other hand, protecting civilians from Taliban and other insurgent attacks -- though extremely difficult -- is a necessary component of any successful counter-terrorist effort. If a government cannot keep its citizens safe, then those citizens will continue to lack faith in that government. The Taliban is likely too embedded into Afghan society to ever be eradicated by military means alone; rather, any lasting peace in the region will almost undoubtedly involve bringing the Taliban to the table. Until then, the war will continue to wind down to a bloody end, if indeed an end is in sight.
Shadow Wars: Yemen Edition
From the mid-2000s onward, the U.S. has fought a shadow war in Pakistan. U.S. relations with Pakistan have ebbed and flowed in that time, with Pakistan often providing intelligence on targets and airstrip space while publicly decrying the drone attacks.
Fast forward to the past two years, where the U.S. has ramped up its involvement in Yemen. While U.S. officials hem and haw, never officially acknowledging the extent of our actions and involvement there, analysts say that we're at war. This sounds familiar: for years, the U.S. conducted the massive, covert drone (and special ops) war in Pakistan without publicly acknowledging it. Officials have become more open about operations in Pakistan in recent years, in part in order to provide legal justification for the continued, aggressive drone campaign.
While the similarities between Pakistan and Yemen are clearly evident, there are some important differences that America must keep in mind as it tailors its response to the growing threat of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). First, AQAP is considered by some analysts, with good reason, to be the most active and lethal al Qaeda affiliate. The underwear bomber, the cargo plane bomb plot (the one with the printer ink cartridges), and the failed NYC bomber were all organized or inspired by AQAP. Even the perpetrator of the Fort Hood massacre, Maj. Hasan, conversed online extensively with now-deceased AQAP leader (and propaganda leader of al Qaeda) Anwar al-Awlaki. Thus, the U.S. must not underestimate the threat posed by this al Qaeda affiliate, and the extent of our recent involvement there suggests that the government is well-aware of the threat and has ramped up operations accordingly.
Furthermore, military operations between U.S. and Yemeni forces is much more cooperative than that of U.S. and Pakistan military personnel. Indeed, the level of mistrust between U.S. and Pakistani military forces (stemming from repeated Pakistani military leaks to Taliban forces) existed for years but was on display for the entire world to see during the bin Laden raid. U.S. military, meanwhile, cooperate with Yemeni counterterrorist operations in much more direct ways:
The U.S. has already articulated reasons for providing aid to Yemen for infrastructure and civil society-building. Meanwhile, when providing billions in aid to Pakistan for years, the U.S. openly admitted that the funds were geared toward helping our partner in the war on terror combat the threat of the Taliban and al Qaeda. The U.S. should, at the very least, articulate a broad policy of providing counter-terrorism assistance to Yemen. I don't know think this would necessarily involve articulating our end-game in that country, especially when the combination of the Arab Spring and the rise of AQAP make the country one of the most unstable in a very unstable region of the world. Ultimately, while our current activities appear to be a proactive effort to tamp down the rise of AQAP, our ultimate long game in Yemen might have to be a reactionary one reflective of the realities of our ability to control the direction and fate of the country.
Fast forward to the past two years, where the U.S. has ramped up its involvement in Yemen. While U.S. officials hem and haw, never officially acknowledging the extent of our actions and involvement there, analysts say that we're at war. This sounds familiar: for years, the U.S. conducted the massive, covert drone (and special ops) war in Pakistan without publicly acknowledging it. Officials have become more open about operations in Pakistan in recent years, in part in order to provide legal justification for the continued, aggressive drone campaign.
While the similarities between Pakistan and Yemen are clearly evident, there are some important differences that America must keep in mind as it tailors its response to the growing threat of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). First, AQAP is considered by some analysts, with good reason, to be the most active and lethal al Qaeda affiliate. The underwear bomber, the cargo plane bomb plot (the one with the printer ink cartridges), and the failed NYC bomber were all organized or inspired by AQAP. Even the perpetrator of the Fort Hood massacre, Maj. Hasan, conversed online extensively with now-deceased AQAP leader (and propaganda leader of al Qaeda) Anwar al-Awlaki. Thus, the U.S. must not underestimate the threat posed by this al Qaeda affiliate, and the extent of our recent involvement there suggests that the government is well-aware of the threat and has ramped up operations accordingly.
Furthermore, military operations between U.S. and Yemeni forces is much more cooperative than that of U.S. and Pakistan military personnel. Indeed, the level of mistrust between U.S. and Pakistani military forces (stemming from repeated Pakistani military leaks to Taliban forces) existed for years but was on display for the entire world to see during the bin Laden raid. U.S. military, meanwhile, cooperate with Yemeni counterterrorist operations in much more direct ways:
In an escalation of America’s clandestine war in Yemen, a small contingent of U.S. troops is providing targeting data for Yemeni airstrikes as government forces battle to dislodge Al Qaeda militants and other insurgents in the country’s restive south, U.S. and Yemeni officials said.Clearly, we are heavily engaged in Yemen right now, but to what end? The always-prescient writers at Danger Room raise this question, and suggest that President Obama admit we're at war and articulate the strategic. Just as there was a time lag regarding operations in Pakistan, however, I think keeping mum about Yemen might make sense for the near future. First, while operations are ramping up, they are nowhere near the level of activity that took place in Pakistan for years without official acknowledgement. While this is not in and of itself a justification to keep quiet about operations, keeping quiet about Yemen allows the U.S. government to be adaptable to the quickly-changing conditions in Yemen. Perhaps the U.S. will not decide whether its goal is "defeat" or merely containment of AQAP until more is known about the feasibility of each option.
Operating from a Yemeni base, at least 20 U.S. special operations troops have used satellite imagery, drone video, eavesdropping systems and other technical means to help pinpoint targets for an offensive that intensified this week, said U.S. and Yemeni officials who asked not to be identified talking about the sensitive operation.
The U.S. forces also advised Yemeni military commanders on where and when to deploy their troops, two senior Obama administration officials said. The U.S. contingent is expected to grow, a senior military official said.
The U.S. has already articulated reasons for providing aid to Yemen for infrastructure and civil society-building. Meanwhile, when providing billions in aid to Pakistan for years, the U.S. openly admitted that the funds were geared toward helping our partner in the war on terror combat the threat of the Taliban and al Qaeda. The U.S. should, at the very least, articulate a broad policy of providing counter-terrorism assistance to Yemen. I don't know think this would necessarily involve articulating our end-game in that country, especially when the combination of the Arab Spring and the rise of AQAP make the country one of the most unstable in a very unstable region of the world. Ultimately, while our current activities appear to be a proactive effort to tamp down the rise of AQAP, our ultimate long game in Yemen might have to be a reactionary one reflective of the realities of our ability to control the direction and fate of the country.
Gaza: An Opportunity for Israeli-Egyptian Cooperation?
The truth is that neither Egypt nor Israel is particularly pleased with the long-term development of Gaza since Israeli disengagement and less so since Hamas took control. Hamas' access to third-party support, financial and otherwise, outside of its neighbors, largely from Iran, gives it significant leverage to develop activities aimed at destabilizing both. With little to no aboveboard economic activity, Gaza's legitimate ties to its neighbors are nothing more than lines in the sand.
Last week, a brazen attack by militants left 16 Egyptian soldiers dead near the border crossing with Rafah. The goal, seemingly to create security problems for both neighbors, is worrisome. While the attack was into Egypt, one vehicle was reportedly driven into Israel for nearly a mile before being destroyed. Egypt has since arrested several suspects, but it's not clear whether this will truly mitigate a growing problem of lawlessness in Sinai, promoted by Hamas and its supporters (even regional news outlets largely share this view). Nonetheless, the Rafah crossing is under constant attack, putting Egypt on the defensive. The border is not the only issue - the problem stems far into Sinai, as evidenced most recently by the attack on peacekeeping forces at its heart. Since Hamas controls the arms, as well as the smuggling tunnels, in Gaza, is there anyone else to blame for the "militant" attacks?
While it is easy to look at the glass half-empty - another security problem in the Middle East threatening to destabilize the region - it can also be seen half-full - an opportunity for two "new" partners (considering Egypt's recent political transition) to cooperate to secure their shared interests. Egypt and Israel have, in the past, cooperated on improving the Rafah crossing in order to benefit legitimate crossing and to mitigate militant operations. Perhaps it will be clearer now that increased cooperation is needed, to secure the border above the sand, destroy the tunnels beneath it, and even to reassert Egypt's presence in Sinai outside of its periphery.
Last week, a brazen attack by militants left 16 Egyptian soldiers dead near the border crossing with Rafah. The goal, seemingly to create security problems for both neighbors, is worrisome. While the attack was into Egypt, one vehicle was reportedly driven into Israel for nearly a mile before being destroyed. Egypt has since arrested several suspects, but it's not clear whether this will truly mitigate a growing problem of lawlessness in Sinai, promoted by Hamas and its supporters (even regional news outlets largely share this view). Nonetheless, the Rafah crossing is under constant attack, putting Egypt on the defensive. The border is not the only issue - the problem stems far into Sinai, as evidenced most recently by the attack on peacekeeping forces at its heart. Since Hamas controls the arms, as well as the smuggling tunnels, in Gaza, is there anyone else to blame for the "militant" attacks?
While it is easy to look at the glass half-empty - another security problem in the Middle East threatening to destabilize the region - it can also be seen half-full - an opportunity for two "new" partners (considering Egypt's recent political transition) to cooperate to secure their shared interests. Egypt and Israel have, in the past, cooperated on improving the Rafah crossing in order to benefit legitimate crossing and to mitigate militant operations. Perhaps it will be clearer now that increased cooperation is needed, to secure the border above the sand, destroy the tunnels beneath it, and even to reassert Egypt's presence in Sinai outside of its periphery.
Friday, August 10, 2012
Globalization is Keeping You on Hold
If you notice longer than average wait times, blame Mother Nature. Massive flooding has swept the Philippines, particularly around Manila, the capital, home of many call centers, both for US and foreign companies. Perhaps outsourcing should adopt some of the energy industry practices, with reserves on hold in case of emergency or demand.
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
Terrorism in America: All About Definitions
In examining terrorism, it is always interesting to see who defines what and how they define it. After all, definitions make all the difference. The 1995 Oklahoma City bombing is widely accepted as a case of domestic terrorism. Similarly, the 2009 Fort Hood shooting is generally considered domestic terrorism. Sunday's shooting at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin is stirring debate - the dividing lines between crime, hate crime, and terrorism.
From a foreign policy end, America is always worried about the leaders of minority and majority ethnic groups stirring hatred and inciting possible violence that could lead to war, or what we call these days low-level civil conflict. Meanwhile at home, we value our freedom of speech, even if that means that one group is allowed to express their hatred of another group. Perhaps America should look inward and examine itself within a foreign policy lens.
The potential for home-grown terrorism has existed for a long time. The Turner Diaries is one example of literature around for years (the specious Protocols of the Elders of Zion being another) that illustrates that the concerns America has when a Sunni-Shia clashes in the oil-rich eastern provinces of Saudi Arabia are reflective of concerns regarding violence and terrorism at home. America is no different in its subtexts; the impressive part being its ability to consistently move on, perhaps with the victims of terrorism and hate crimes being so subsumed by its high murder rate (both gun related and otherwise).
A scary thought within all this is perhaps the failure of basic cultural education - that it may be possible for a man with blind hatred and ambition to commit an act of terrorism against one group cannot distinguish it from an entirely different population. This incident speaks volumes about how globalization may be bringing the world closer in many facets, but perhaps not in the most important: understanding of one another.
Regardless of the definition one chooses to apply for terrorism, there has always been one overarching standard: you know it when you see it. In Wisconsin, we saw terrorism.
From a foreign policy end, America is always worried about the leaders of minority and majority ethnic groups stirring hatred and inciting possible violence that could lead to war, or what we call these days low-level civil conflict. Meanwhile at home, we value our freedom of speech, even if that means that one group is allowed to express their hatred of another group. Perhaps America should look inward and examine itself within a foreign policy lens.
The potential for home-grown terrorism has existed for a long time. The Turner Diaries is one example of literature around for years (the specious Protocols of the Elders of Zion being another) that illustrates that the concerns America has when a Sunni-Shia clashes in the oil-rich eastern provinces of Saudi Arabia are reflective of concerns regarding violence and terrorism at home. America is no different in its subtexts; the impressive part being its ability to consistently move on, perhaps with the victims of terrorism and hate crimes being so subsumed by its high murder rate (both gun related and otherwise).
A scary thought within all this is perhaps the failure of basic cultural education - that it may be possible for a man with blind hatred and ambition to commit an act of terrorism against one group cannot distinguish it from an entirely different population. This incident speaks volumes about how globalization may be bringing the world closer in many facets, but perhaps not in the most important: understanding of one another.
Regardless of the definition one chooses to apply for terrorism, there has always been one overarching standard: you know it when you see it. In Wisconsin, we saw terrorism.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
NCIS Outtakes: The Silly Season
If you watch the always-entertaining show NCIS, you know that just about everything they investigate involves murder (cue Gibbs saying "we got a body") and much also involves serious national security threats.
Occassionally, however, NCIS apparently delves into the silly, harrassing news organizations over unclassified information simply because it is marked "FOUO" (For Official Use Only). Now I know military personnel aren't supposed to release FOUO information, but still -- with all the presumably pressing things to investigate, this one seems extremely low on the totem pole. Basically, the military put out a pie-in-the-sky request for companies to create a laser-mounted drone that could shoot individuals (and maybe burn their clothes off or something like that). This sounds very similar to the public announcements made by DARPA and other DOD agencies all the time.
Meanwhile, I hope this documentary on next-generation laser technology is on someone's radar at NCIS.
Occassionally, however, NCIS apparently delves into the silly, harrassing news organizations over unclassified information simply because it is marked "FOUO" (For Official Use Only). Now I know military personnel aren't supposed to release FOUO information, but still -- with all the presumably pressing things to investigate, this one seems extremely low on the totem pole. Basically, the military put out a pie-in-the-sky request for companies to create a laser-mounted drone that could shoot individuals (and maybe burn their clothes off or something like that). This sounds very similar to the public announcements made by DARPA and other DOD agencies all the time.
Meanwhile, I hope this documentary on next-generation laser technology is on someone's radar at NCIS.
Friday, August 3, 2012
The Opening of Libya: Cinnabon
A short article earlier today notes that Cinnabon is the first US franchise in Libya. So following months of air support during civil war and then assistance getting the oil flowing, the US sends in...Cinnabon. Apparently, this move is successful and sales are booming - of course no one can resist the chemically induced indulgences created by American manufacturing genius. This does beg the question of which other franchises or, more critically, international businesses are looking at opening up in Libya, which is no longer the pariah state it once was, or the wild west that followed it. It can only be hoped that Cinnabon in Tripoli does not turn out to be the KFC in Fallujah.
Thursday, August 2, 2012
Annan Resigns, Endgame Approaches?
Kofi Annan resigned today as the UN-Arab League envoy to Syria.
To start, this decision was neither courageous nor timely. Moreover, Annan did not all-out resign, but rather chose to accept the inevitable and request that his position not be renewed when it expires, in nearly a month (August 31).
This peace plan and partnership with the Arab League never had any bite. Both sides undermined the agreement as well as its principles. The end result: more death and destruction.
The only hope is, Annan's resignation turns the tide, displays that peaceful coexistence with Syria's current leadership is untenable, and ends the silent partnership between certain nations and Syria's neptocracy. Acceptance of the status quo, or its waverings, may finally open up to a new Syria.
To start, this decision was neither courageous nor timely. Moreover, Annan did not all-out resign, but rather chose to accept the inevitable and request that his position not be renewed when it expires, in nearly a month (August 31).
This peace plan and partnership with the Arab League never had any bite. Both sides undermined the agreement as well as its principles. The end result: more death and destruction.
The only hope is, Annan's resignation turns the tide, displays that peaceful coexistence with Syria's current leadership is untenable, and ends the silent partnership between certain nations and Syria's neptocracy. Acceptance of the status quo, or its waverings, may finally open up to a new Syria.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)