Monday, February 28 2005
THREADS OF CHANGE: Michael Barone has nice wrap up of various comments supporting the idea that changes in the Middle East are occurring with surprising rapidity.

Add to Barone's list this lead paragraph from an editorial in today's Arab News:

All nations which aspire to a genuine democracy must have at the forefront free and fair elections. They must, of their choosing, elect representatives who will be of the people and for the people. Any country lacking a genuine ballot box can only pretend to be democratic. In the Middle East, pretenses are now being pushed aside for the real thing. We have seen unprecedented elections in Iraq and Palestine and nationwide municipal elections in the Kingdom. Now Egypt is also to be added to the list of countries participating in democracy in the Middle East.

And this from today's Gulf News:

The decision (for election reform in Egypt) can only be described as historic because the changes widen the base of popular participation in the political process. Any measures that facilitate the representation of the popular voice should be applauded and welcomed.

There are also encouraging signs for women. Hamid Karzai is set to appoint the first woman governor in Afghanistan's history. Again today's Gulf News editorializes:

There has been opposition to her nomination, but the fact that it is certain to materialise speaks for the changing times.

As the governor of a province populated by warlords and commanders, Sarabi will represent all that is going right for Afghanistan in its efforts to shed the shackles of the past.

Finally, check out the responses of Prince Saud al-Faisal of Saudi Arabia in a recent interview with Lally Weymouth of Newsweek:

Q: Should Saudi women be allowed to vote in the next municipal elections?
PRINCE SAUD: Even the commissioner of elections has said that he is going to propose that they vote. So I am assuming that they will vote in the next election, and that is going to be good for the election, because I think women are more sensible voters than men.

Q: Do you agree that women should take a more active part in your society?
PRINCE SAUD: I agree wholeheartedly. Things must happen in a gradual way. But I am proud that the Foreign Ministry is doing its part. For the first time, we are going to have women in the Foreign Ministry this year.

The most deeply pessimistic view one can take of all this is that regimes in the Middle East and the Arab world now feel pressured into giving lip service to election reform and to making cosmetic changes allowing women more rights and participation in the process of government. But even this is an improvement from where we were just a few short months ago. You don't have to be a full-blooded neocon to feel a twinge of cautious optimism in your gut over these recent events and to hope they are the beginning of something much bigger.

THE WAR AT HOME: Meanwhile, some at home still aren't getting it.Ten days ago Anna Schlotz and Snehal Shingavi wrote in the Daily Californian:

The anti-war movement has a responsibility to support the resistance as the struggle for the basic human rights of freedom from occupation, self-determination, and the ability to live with dignity; and to place the blame for chaos, civil war and terrorism squarely at the feet of American bombs and foreign policy. After all, the only thing standing in the way of U.S. plans to attack North Korea, Iran or Syria is the implacability of Iraqi resistance.

We believe it has become impossible any longer to be anti-war without also being pro-resistance. The occupation will only end if the Iraqi people are successful at dealing increasingly decisive blows to a U.S. military that shows no signs of leaving.

No doubt Schlotz and Shingavi are taking great satisfaction in the murder of more than 100 innocent citizens in Hilla yesterday by the "Iraqi resistance."

I don't want to make too much of of a couple of morally confused campus radicals or to suggest there are more than a handful of hard-left Democrats felt the same way. But, at the same time, it's fair to recognize that the position these two people are taking is only a step or two further down the slippery slope from Michael Moore calling the insurgents in Iraq "freedom fighters."

AND THE AWARD FOR BIGGEST LIAR AND CHEAT GOES TO...: Ward Churchill. And as many of you predicted, is wasn't that close: Churchill beat Bonds by more than 2 to 1.

Most who voted for Churchill felt that his offenses were greater because they had to do with issues much larger than baseball and that at the end of the day Barry Bonds is just lying about a silly game.

Still others pointed out that Bonds had a certain God-given talent for hitting a baseball which he sought to chemically enhance while Churchill's only God-given talent seems to have been the ability to lie about everything from his resume to his research to his skills as an artist.

Many who voted for Bonds, on the other hand, felt he was more deserving of the award because of his stature in society as an influential role model. After all, despite being a professor of "ethnic studies" at a major state university, Churchill is a fringe left-wing crank who nobody takes seriously and who will be forgotten about five minutes from now. Barry Bonds is (or probably was) a hero to millions of kids and a steward of America's national pastime. The damage he has done to the game is significant and irreparable.

Anyway, thanks to all who voted. - T. Bevan 1:52 pm Link | Email | Send to a Friend