Where was all this? Air Force One was revving to leave Israel following the funeral of Ex-President Shimon Perez, that titan of Israeli and Middle East politics. Indeed, of the world. And Bill was bending protocol, some, keeping the sitting President waiting thusly. In full view of the world
Showing posts with label Israel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Israel. Show all posts
Saturday, October 01, 2016
Matatu Raga on Air Force One: Obama's Beba Beba Call to Bill Clinton
WATCH: Sitting President Obama (son of Kenya, appropriately) shouts "Beba beba!", sort of, to former President Bill Clinton (and husband of the next), urging him to get aboard Air Force One rather more pronto than he was inclined to.
Where was all this? Air Force One was revving to leave Israel following the funeral of Ex-President Shimon Perez, that titan of Israeli and Middle East politics. Indeed, of the world. And Bill was bending protocol, some, keeping the sitting President waiting thusly. In full view of the world
Where was all this? Air Force One was revving to leave Israel following the funeral of Ex-President Shimon Perez, that titan of Israeli and Middle East politics. Indeed, of the world. And Bill was bending protocol, some, keeping the sitting President waiting thusly. In full view of the world
Thursday, February 02, 2012
THE THREE DIALECTICS: Dynamics of the Israeli-Palestinian Question
The
dialectical approach is an ever-present route to a deeper understanding of the
Israeli-Palestinian question. It seems to me that this approach becomes increasingly
attractive and fruitful with the passage of time – that is, with each passing decade.
We may even add that its revelations (I use that term consciously) are
generationally packaged in a broad sense; which means that we have three
sequential packages so far (that is, since 1948) to worry over.
There are
indeed three dialectics, which intertwine, in the Israeli-Palestinian Question;
and their intertwining is itself of a dialectical nature.
The first of
these is what I will call the Occupation Dialectic -- the Territorial Dialectic,
if you wish. Here, the struggle/confrontation/ hostilities/contradiction or
thesis-antithesis conflict, now on and now off, revolves around historical
rights to territory and unfettered settlement, self-determination, settlement
The second
is the Conversation (or Voice) Dialectic. Issues here are couched in highly
emotive historical, cultural and religious terms. Each side invokes history,
and even chronology, in support of its arguments. The Palestinians want their
own independent state, with Jerusalem included. The Israelis want secure
borders, in which its citizens are safe from remotely or otherwise instigated
and organized attacks -- by PLO originally and Hizbollah and the like now. The
Palestinians view the Israelis as an illegitimate occupying force. Israelis
insist there is nowhere they are going,
The third is
the Action (or Power) Dialectic. Technology, particularly the technology of war
and of surveillance, plays a key role here – and may yet be the decider, the
Endgame factor. And the game may not
quite end in the way the protagonists typically frame the end.
[First written on January 5, 2009. To be expanded upon]
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
The Year, It Seems, Will End With a Whimper!
The year 2008, it seems, will end with a whimper -- such as it did not begin with. So it seems, at 5.14 p.m., here in Nairobi.
Of course, I know there is bloody fighting over there in the Middle East [Israel does have an inalienable right to defend itself, and Palestinians have a God-given right to a safe and secure home. So, where does that leave the Hamas militants who unilaterally provoked the latest bloodbath?]
But I'm talking about Nairobi and about Kenya, as I watch the year tick away toward the last midnight. The bloodbath that began this time last year was here, not there.
And yet, as they say, it aint over till it's over. There are a few hours yet.
How was your last day of the year? Quiet and ordinary was mine. A little pensive, thinking back to this time last year; which is why this year began, for us, as it did -- and seemingly will end quite differently. A lot pensive, in fact.
Did a little walkabout in town. Bought two (perhaps contraband) CDs of Congolese Oldies and Goodies (Veve's music). Some memories die hard.
Even bumped into my VC at a supermarket in town -- completely unexpectedly. He was gracious enough to step over for to exchange a few pleasantries. Of course he is always gracious in those one-on-ones. That's my experience. But we hadn't previously met at a supermarket, or even outside the campus. It was, then, a surprise encounter -- and I was rather surprised at my surprise.
It has been a quite year for me, and in several ways quite re-energizing. I think Joan, my wife, would agree. But I have to stop this blogging now, for I have to go see her, before the year runs out.
Of course, I know there is bloody fighting over there in the Middle East [Israel does have an inalienable right to defend itself, and Palestinians have a God-given right to a safe and secure home. So, where does that leave the Hamas militants who unilaterally provoked the latest bloodbath?]
But I'm talking about Nairobi and about Kenya, as I watch the year tick away toward the last midnight. The bloodbath that began this time last year was here, not there.
And yet, as they say, it aint over till it's over. There are a few hours yet.
How was your last day of the year? Quiet and ordinary was mine. A little pensive, thinking back to this time last year; which is why this year began, for us, as it did -- and seemingly will end quite differently. A lot pensive, in fact.
Did a little walkabout in town. Bought two (perhaps contraband) CDs of Congolese Oldies and Goodies (Veve's music). Some memories die hard.
Even bumped into my VC at a supermarket in town -- completely unexpectedly. He was gracious enough to step over for to exchange a few pleasantries. Of course he is always gracious in those one-on-ones. That's my experience. But we hadn't previously met at a supermarket, or even outside the campus. It was, then, a surprise encounter -- and I was rather surprised at my surprise.
It has been a quite year for me, and in several ways quite re-energizing. I think Joan, my wife, would agree. But I have to stop this blogging now, for I have to go see her, before the year runs out.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Gaddafi and Obama
Gaddafi, I suppose, still has many admirers around Africa; but I think his claim last week that Obama's support for Israel stems from an "inferiority complex" itself smacks suspiciously of a bigoted mind clothed in radicalism -- a bigotry which, on reflection, emanates from an all-too-familiar "superiority complex" of the North; and a radicalism more Arab-nationalist than leftist. He was not just verbalizing his mind's picture of Obama, millions in Sub-Saharan Africa will conclude, but of all Africans who do not share his uncomplicated view of an increasingly complex world. He has just lost their goodwill, to the extent that he still had it.
To argue that Obama will (I use will and not would), on account of his mixed race and therefore deep sense of inferiority, be, as the next US President, "more white than white people" in his policy toward Israel and, presumably, the Middle East as a whole, is to display one's own sheltered inattention to evidentiary detail.
In fact, many Jewish voters in the US worry about Obama's candidacy, but on opposing grounds. They worry that he will be overly inclined to engage Hamas and Iran, and any Gaddafis who still live in the Seventies and Eighties, in serious diplomacy (rather than sabre-rattling); all at the expense of Israel's security interests. On the other hand, many Israelis share his view that it is better to engage in tough diplomacy than to wage war. Why Gaddafi considers this a sign of "inferiority complex" only he and his cheering crowd can explain.
Having said that, I must concede that Obama inexplicably went overboard in his recent address to a Jewish-American gathering when he stated categorically that Jerusalem must remain, undivided and singularly, in Israeli hands. The ultimate status of Jerusalem must remain the subject of genuine diplomatic engagement, even as the Palestinian right to an independent state contiguous to a sovereign and secure Israel remains an article of faith.
Gaddafi should be careful not to be swayed by stereotypes which date back to a slave-trade era which Black Africa is too magnanimous to keep reminding all and sundry. And let him ponder the following: would Obama have bombed Libya with more ferocity than Reagan did, and maybe gone all out to kill him (Gaddafi)? In Gulf War I, Colin Powell, a black general, called off further bombing of Iraqi field forces (against the wishes of more war-like colleagues) when he saw that enough carnage was enough -- and that there was no need to continue with the carpet bombing and all the shooting all the way to Baghdad, after the Iraqi forces had already been defeated. Was that a sign of "inferiority complex", or humane military leadership? Obama was opposed to G.W. Bush's push for Gulf War II. In voting against that war, was he the caricature Gaddafi spins in his mind?
Would Obama have worked behind the scenes to ensure that Saddam was hanged, as many suspect that Bush did? How would Obama dealt with Lockerbee? Looking further back, we remember that Harry Truman dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but not Tokyo -- to bring militarist Japan to its knees. Does Gaddafi's reading of Obama's mind suggest that he would have dropped them on Tokyo instead, being "more white than white", and perhaps on Berlin itself -- although Berlin would have been a fundamental and perhaps impeachable contradiction?
To be fair to Gaddafi, his impression of Obama is probably partly constructed from his reading of the latter's autobiography -- and of accounts therein of Obama's search across two continents for his roots and the fullness of his identity. I think that reading, in whatever way it took place, was in fact a mis-reading of the man Obama has become. Obama's journeys to Kogelo, Kenya, display an inner self and an inner drive that is truly admirable and exemplary.
Am I biased? Perhaps, but I have good and countless company. Yet I must ask, is this any thinking person's idea of a future President weighed down by "inferiority complex": a "Freshman" with only four years' experience in the US Senate, who nevertheless dares to run; a black man, with a "funny" name and no wealth to talk of, holding America's hand in order to take her, willingly, "to a better place"; a man proud of his Kenyan and Scottish-Irish roots in equal measures? No!
You wrong the man, Gaddafi!
May the two one day meet face-to-face and become true brothers, true brothers of the 21st century -- perhaps at UN headquarters, perhaps in Gaddafi's Great Tent, perhaps at Kogelo! Let me in fact suggest Kogelo! Meanwhile, we await Gaddafi's own account of his early years -- before and after his coup. He owes that to history. Then we will also pay homage to whatever his roots are.
To argue that Obama will (I use will and not would), on account of his mixed race and therefore deep sense of inferiority, be, as the next US President, "more white than white people" in his policy toward Israel and, presumably, the Middle East as a whole, is to display one's own sheltered inattention to evidentiary detail.
In fact, many Jewish voters in the US worry about Obama's candidacy, but on opposing grounds. They worry that he will be overly inclined to engage Hamas and Iran, and any Gaddafis who still live in the Seventies and Eighties, in serious diplomacy (rather than sabre-rattling); all at the expense of Israel's security interests. On the other hand, many Israelis share his view that it is better to engage in tough diplomacy than to wage war. Why Gaddafi considers this a sign of "inferiority complex" only he and his cheering crowd can explain.
Having said that, I must concede that Obama inexplicably went overboard in his recent address to a Jewish-American gathering when he stated categorically that Jerusalem must remain, undivided and singularly, in Israeli hands. The ultimate status of Jerusalem must remain the subject of genuine diplomatic engagement, even as the Palestinian right to an independent state contiguous to a sovereign and secure Israel remains an article of faith.
Gaddafi should be careful not to be swayed by stereotypes which date back to a slave-trade era which Black Africa is too magnanimous to keep reminding all and sundry. And let him ponder the following: would Obama have bombed Libya with more ferocity than Reagan did, and maybe gone all out to kill him (Gaddafi)? In Gulf War I, Colin Powell, a black general, called off further bombing of Iraqi field forces (against the wishes of more war-like colleagues) when he saw that enough carnage was enough -- and that there was no need to continue with the carpet bombing and all the shooting all the way to Baghdad, after the Iraqi forces had already been defeated. Was that a sign of "inferiority complex", or humane military leadership? Obama was opposed to G.W. Bush's push for Gulf War II. In voting against that war, was he the caricature Gaddafi spins in his mind?
Would Obama have worked behind the scenes to ensure that Saddam was hanged, as many suspect that Bush did? How would Obama dealt with Lockerbee? Looking further back, we remember that Harry Truman dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but not Tokyo -- to bring militarist Japan to its knees. Does Gaddafi's reading of Obama's mind suggest that he would have dropped them on Tokyo instead, being "more white than white", and perhaps on Berlin itself -- although Berlin would have been a fundamental and perhaps impeachable contradiction?
To be fair to Gaddafi, his impression of Obama is probably partly constructed from his reading of the latter's autobiography -- and of accounts therein of Obama's search across two continents for his roots and the fullness of his identity. I think that reading, in whatever way it took place, was in fact a mis-reading of the man Obama has become. Obama's journeys to Kogelo, Kenya, display an inner self and an inner drive that is truly admirable and exemplary.
Am I biased? Perhaps, but I have good and countless company. Yet I must ask, is this any thinking person's idea of a future President weighed down by "inferiority complex": a "Freshman" with only four years' experience in the US Senate, who nevertheless dares to run; a black man, with a "funny" name and no wealth to talk of, holding America's hand in order to take her, willingly, "to a better place"; a man proud of his Kenyan and Scottish-Irish roots in equal measures? No!
You wrong the man, Gaddafi!
May the two one day meet face-to-face and become true brothers, true brothers of the 21st century -- perhaps at UN headquarters, perhaps in Gaddafi's Great Tent, perhaps at Kogelo! Let me in fact suggest Kogelo! Meanwhile, we await Gaddafi's own account of his early years -- before and after his coup. He owes that to history. Then we will also pay homage to whatever his roots are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)