...in my life:
So...after a few weeks of cold-hearted resignation, my original internship appears to be working out after all. Assuming everything goes to plan (ha!) it starts in ten days in Washington, D.C. I need 400 hours for my degree requirement and--due to the delay--I have approximately 40 working days to do it in. You do the math. Basically, this blog is likely to go dormant until September. But take heart, dear readers. Come the fall I will likely revive this blog (maybe with a new name?), unless I end up not being able to afford my last year of grad school, in which case I will definitely revive it.
In the meantime, I highly recommend al-Jazeera English as your primary means of staying abreast of developments in the Arab world. Unless you want to know about Qatar.
About Me
- BJ
- I had plans for a super-awesome summer internship involving Middle East policy. Those plans went kaput, but I've decided to do what I'd be doing anyway, for personal edification and satisfaction. And fame, obviously.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Monday, June 20, 2011
Bashar al-Assad's Three Kinds of Protesters
Today in Damascus, Syria's president-for-life Bashar al-Assad delivered his first official address in two months, broadcast live via state media and international outlets like BBC Arabic. His words were simply fascinating, and I've spent the morning on Youtube looking for the whole speech (part 1 of BBC Arabic coverage uploaded to Youtube) and reactions from various camps (political camps and refugee camps in Turkey).
You can get a fairly comprehensive look at the speech from this al-Jazeera English article (Arabic counterpart here). Al-Assad acknowledged that there are some protesters with legitimate concerns. But he also said there are 64,000 lawless vandals and a third group composed of "radical and blasphemous intellectuals." Even though he conceded the presence of peaceful protesters, there's no reason to believe the supposed presence of elements from the other two groups won't continue to be used as an excuse for the military to conduct armed assaults on civilian targets. Al-Assad also has not abandoned the claim that "outside elements" are instigating the violent conflict inside Syria.
Al-Assad promised to address the grievances of peaceful protesters. I think al-Assad is going to make up relatively minor grievances and "fix" them as an attempt to regain some legitimacy. For instance, he reiterated his pledge to pardon some of those involved in the protests. Um...it's not like people initially started protesting to demand the pardon of protest participants (though many protesters do want to see an end to arbitrary arrests). If al-Assad really wanted to introduce reform aimed at quelling the violence, he'd announce the cessation of arbitrary arrests altogether, instead of vague promises about going easy on those protesting for the past three months.
As another component of his "reform" plan, al-Assad seems to be taking a page out of King Abdullah's book, calling for national dialogue committees of a total of about 100 people to discuss the country's problems and brainstorm solutions. In Jordan, some people dismissed the committee as illegitimate, claiming that since the government convened the committee, it could not be free and independent in its recommendations. I suspect that will be the same case with Syria--with each committee member hand-picked as a "safe choice" and each recommendation reviewed by the regime for approval.
Another disappointing sign was al-Assad's repeated call for "a return"--"a return to a normal way of life," the return of the army to its barracks, the return of Syria to tranquility and "freedom"... basically, a return to exactly how things were before the protests began.
Perhaps the most stunning example of al-Assad's denial was at the very beginning of the speech, when he said, among other interesting blessings, "Peace be upon every mother who lost a loved one, and on every child who lost a parent." As if that blood is not on his hands, in large part.
That's largely how Syrian audiences in the Turkish refugee camps--the easiest Syrian audience for international media to reach--reacted. Most seemed to react to al-Assad's call for them to return to Syria with contempt and suspicion.
Still, not all Syrians have abandoned the president, and despite reports of defections, the military seems to be holding together well enough with their tanks and automatic weapons against the onslaught of civilians armed with protest signs and rocks.
In other Syria-related news, Russian president Dmitri Medvedev clarified his country's position on the crisis, reiterating that Russia will use its veto to defeat any UN resolution on Syria similar to Resolution 1973, which many feel NATO abused to enter into military involvement in Libya. According to this al-Jazeera Arabic article, "he placed moral responsibility for the civilian casualties on the Syrian regime" but went on to say that "he believes Damascus's promises of reform." That makes one of us, I guess.
You can get a fairly comprehensive look at the speech from this al-Jazeera English article (Arabic counterpart here). Al-Assad acknowledged that there are some protesters with legitimate concerns. But he also said there are 64,000 lawless vandals and a third group composed of "radical and blasphemous intellectuals." Even though he conceded the presence of peaceful protesters, there's no reason to believe the supposed presence of elements from the other two groups won't continue to be used as an excuse for the military to conduct armed assaults on civilian targets. Al-Assad also has not abandoned the claim that "outside elements" are instigating the violent conflict inside Syria.
Al-Assad promised to address the grievances of peaceful protesters. I think al-Assad is going to make up relatively minor grievances and "fix" them as an attempt to regain some legitimacy. For instance, he reiterated his pledge to pardon some of those involved in the protests. Um...it's not like people initially started protesting to demand the pardon of protest participants (though many protesters do want to see an end to arbitrary arrests). If al-Assad really wanted to introduce reform aimed at quelling the violence, he'd announce the cessation of arbitrary arrests altogether, instead of vague promises about going easy on those protesting for the past three months.
As another component of his "reform" plan, al-Assad seems to be taking a page out of King Abdullah's book, calling for national dialogue committees of a total of about 100 people to discuss the country's problems and brainstorm solutions. In Jordan, some people dismissed the committee as illegitimate, claiming that since the government convened the committee, it could not be free and independent in its recommendations. I suspect that will be the same case with Syria--with each committee member hand-picked as a "safe choice" and each recommendation reviewed by the regime for approval.
Another disappointing sign was al-Assad's repeated call for "a return"--"a return to a normal way of life," the return of the army to its barracks, the return of Syria to tranquility and "freedom"... basically, a return to exactly how things were before the protests began.
Perhaps the most stunning example of al-Assad's denial was at the very beginning of the speech, when he said, among other interesting blessings, "Peace be upon every mother who lost a loved one, and on every child who lost a parent." As if that blood is not on his hands, in large part.
That's largely how Syrian audiences in the Turkish refugee camps--the easiest Syrian audience for international media to reach--reacted. Most seemed to react to al-Assad's call for them to return to Syria with contempt and suspicion.
Still, not all Syrians have abandoned the president, and despite reports of defections, the military seems to be holding together well enough with their tanks and automatic weapons against the onslaught of civilians armed with protest signs and rocks.
In other Syria-related news, Russian president Dmitri Medvedev clarified his country's position on the crisis, reiterating that Russia will use its veto to defeat any UN resolution on Syria similar to Resolution 1973, which many feel NATO abused to enter into military involvement in Libya. According to this al-Jazeera Arabic article, "he placed moral responsibility for the civilian casualties on the Syrian regime" but went on to say that "he believes Damascus's promises of reform." That makes one of us, I guess.
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Hillary Clinton Has Been Busy
In the past couple of days, the US and several of its NATO allies have been engaging in intensive diplomacy in an attempt to get the required votes to pass another UN resolution condemning the continued violent crackdown in Syria. According to State Department sources, Clinton has been in talks with Russian and Chinese officials*--Russia and China representing the most significant barriers to the resolution's passage, as the holdouts among permanent security council members. The results of these talks remain to be seen--although Presidents Dmitri Medvedev and Hu Jintao issued a statement reiterating their stance against foreign intervention in Syria's internal affairs. The statement indicated that the "international community can provide constructive help to prevent deterioration of the situation" but stopped short of saying what sort of action that might entail.
And all of this over a resolution that doesn't have any sanctions or restrictions in it. Just words.
Nicolai Sarkozy and Angela Merkel held talks in Berlin to talk strategy, and in a press conference afterward, Sarkozy said they have agreed to "tighten sanctions" on Syria. What those more stringent sanctions might be is anyone's guess. A US government source indicated that the US officials are considering pursuing war crimes charges against Syria as a means to increase pressure. But what would that change? You think Bashar al-Assad will call off the dogs just because of being labeled a "war criminal?" 'Fraid not.
*In a fascinating inconsistency, the al-Jazeera English article says no call with Chinese officials has occurred, while the Arabic one says it has.
Sources for this post:
al-Jazeera Arabic article with super-flattering Clinton picture (not)
al-Jazeera Arabic rundown of ongoing diplomatic posturing
al-Jazeera Arabic rundown of Friday's protests (possible graphic photo about halfway down)
al-Jazeera English article on some of this
And all of this over a resolution that doesn't have any sanctions or restrictions in it. Just words.
Nicolai Sarkozy and Angela Merkel held talks in Berlin to talk strategy, and in a press conference afterward, Sarkozy said they have agreed to "tighten sanctions" on Syria. What those more stringent sanctions might be is anyone's guess. A US government source indicated that the US officials are considering pursuing war crimes charges against Syria as a means to increase pressure. But what would that change? You think Bashar al-Assad will call off the dogs just because of being labeled a "war criminal?" 'Fraid not.
*In a fascinating inconsistency, the al-Jazeera English article says no call with Chinese officials has occurred, while the Arabic one says it has.
Sources for this post:
al-Jazeera Arabic article with super-flattering Clinton picture (not)
al-Jazeera Arabic rundown of ongoing diplomatic posturing
al-Jazeera Arabic rundown of Friday's protests (possible graphic photo about halfway down)
al-Jazeera English article on some of this
Thursday, June 16, 2011
In Today's Obvious News
To absolutely no one's surprise, Ayman al-Zawahiri has been appointed the new al-Qaeda leader following Osama bin Laden's death in a US raid last month. al-Jazeera English report This is a good PR move for al-Qaeda, seeing as al-Zarqawi is probably the only al-Qaeda commander left alive whose name is somewhat known on the American street.
In other sadly predictable news, the "deplorable" situation in Syria continues, and the international community continues to watch idly. This (al-Jazeera English) explains why Russia and China (among others) are continuing to stonewall efforts in the UN to issue another resolution condemning the violence against civilians. Basically, NATO used a similar resolution to justify military action in Libya, and some countries anticipate a similar trajectory with respect to Syria. Other, more cynical voices also point to military and economic interests China and Russia have in Syria.
International observers are still not being let in to Syria to assess the conditions, investigate claims of torture and mass killings, and provide humanitarian aid. Unfortunately, that is not likely to change. It's times like these I wish there was a special, highly-trained force of humanitarian relief workers trained in covert operations. Like Green Berets, but armed with water and medicine instead of guns and whatnot.
In other sadly predictable news, the "deplorable" situation in Syria continues, and the international community continues to watch idly. This (al-Jazeera English) explains why Russia and China (among others) are continuing to stonewall efforts in the UN to issue another resolution condemning the violence against civilians. Basically, NATO used a similar resolution to justify military action in Libya, and some countries anticipate a similar trajectory with respect to Syria. Other, more cynical voices also point to military and economic interests China and Russia have in Syria.
International observers are still not being let in to Syria to assess the conditions, investigate claims of torture and mass killings, and provide humanitarian aid. Unfortunately, that is not likely to change. It's times like these I wish there was a special, highly-trained force of humanitarian relief workers trained in covert operations. Like Green Berets, but armed with water and medicine instead of guns and whatnot.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Al-Jazeera Follows This Blog
...not intended to be a factual statement. But al-Jazeera Arabic did post a more in-depth article on Jordan after I posted yesterday.
In order to appease discontented protesters, King Abdullah put together a "National Dialogue Committee" tasked with identifying needed reforms. In a speech last week, the King already expressed his willingness to go along with the committee's directives pertaining to the party system and the appointment of cabinet members and prime ministers (currently the sole discretion of the King).
But as one critic pointed out in an interview with al-Jazeera, the committee was formed and overseen by the government, keeping control in the government itself and away from the people. He sees this shortcoming of the committee as exacerbating mistrust between the government and the Jordanian people.
Scholars and activists are also debating whether reforming policies will be enough, given the over-bureaucratization and pervasive corruption that hinder most efforts to reform. Some point to deeper problems inherent in the system of government that make it weak, hesitant, and slow--problems that must be addressed aggressively, instead of spreading a veneer of reform over the surface of an essentially unchanged crisis.
I agree with many international observers in thinking that the fact that King Abdullah is willing to cede some powers is a good sign for Jordan. It's a sign of, as the al-Jazeera article puts it, "the existence of the political will to achieve reform." What remains to be seen is if intensive efforts to root out corruption will be implemented effectively.
If you look at the photo at the top of the al-Jazeera article, both protest signs refer specifically to corruption. The one on the left says "In the presence of corruption, all pay the price." The one on the right reads "Toward a Jordan free from corruption."
In order to appease discontented protesters, King Abdullah put together a "National Dialogue Committee" tasked with identifying needed reforms. In a speech last week, the King already expressed his willingness to go along with the committee's directives pertaining to the party system and the appointment of cabinet members and prime ministers (currently the sole discretion of the King).
But as one critic pointed out in an interview with al-Jazeera, the committee was formed and overseen by the government, keeping control in the government itself and away from the people. He sees this shortcoming of the committee as exacerbating mistrust between the government and the Jordanian people.
Scholars and activists are also debating whether reforming policies will be enough, given the over-bureaucratization and pervasive corruption that hinder most efforts to reform. Some point to deeper problems inherent in the system of government that make it weak, hesitant, and slow--problems that must be addressed aggressively, instead of spreading a veneer of reform over the surface of an essentially unchanged crisis.
I agree with many international observers in thinking that the fact that King Abdullah is willing to cede some powers is a good sign for Jordan. It's a sign of, as the al-Jazeera article puts it, "the existence of the political will to achieve reform." What remains to be seen is if intensive efforts to root out corruption will be implemented effectively.
If you look at the photo at the top of the al-Jazeera article, both protest signs refer specifically to corruption. The one on the left says "In the presence of corruption, all pay the price." The one on the right reads "Toward a Jordan free from corruption."
Ben Ali Trial Set
Ousted Tunisian president Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali and his wife Leila are probably living it up in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, due to a Saudi non-response to Tunisia's extradition request. But the interim government has decided to proceed with the trial in absentia, beginning June 20 (al-Jazeera Arabic; New York Times). Mr. and Mrs. Ben Ali face between 5 and 20 years in prison on preliminary charges related to "drugs, weapons and racketeering," although interim president al-Baji al-Sebsi indicated additional charges could be added later.
The trial in absentia leads to the inevitable debate over whether the trial means anything if Ben Ali can't actually be incarcerated at the end of it. It may be important just to to bring a sense of closure to the whole ordeal, and as an opportunity to sift through the detritus of the past 23 years and see what went wrong. After all, those who do not learn from the past are doomed to relive it.
The trial in absentia leads to the inevitable debate over whether the trial means anything if Ben Ali can't actually be incarcerated at the end of it. It may be important just to to bring a sense of closure to the whole ordeal, and as an opportunity to sift through the detritus of the past 23 years and see what went wrong. After all, those who do not learn from the past are doomed to relive it.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Quick Link: Syrian Army Defections
Josh Landis's take
Following up on yesterday's post about how the violence could end if the army would stand with the Syrian people.
Following up on yesterday's post about how the violence could end if the army would stand with the Syrian people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)