Mideast Media Sampler 05/02/2011

From an email from DG:

1) Assorted Bin Laden links

• The Philosopher of Islamic terror (Sayyid Qutb) by Paul Berman
• Terrorism on trial by Pipes and Emerson
• When innocents are the enemy by Michael Kelly
• Is there a legal geography of War by Kenneth Anderson
• Pakistan Tells U.S. It Must Sharply Cut C.I.A. Activities

It's hard to believe that the compound where Bin Laden was killed wasn't built with official assistance or at least knowledge. That 3 weeks ago Pakistan was asking the United States to curtail its CIA activity is unsettling.

The Lede with asssorted reactions to Bin Laden's killing.

2) Studying abroad, I got caught in Syria’s crackdown by Pathik Root

During my detention I met a cross section of the hundreds of men being held in the same prison. Many told me they had been held for months or years without charge or humane treatment. They ranged from boys as young as about 14 to men as old as 70. They were mostly Syrians but included Iraqis, Lebanese and Jordanians. Most were uneducated; one was a mentally handicapped soldier who appeared to be detained solely because no one knew what to do with him.

3) Editorials about the Fatah-Hamas deal.

To my mind its curious that neither the Washington Post nor the New York Times has featured an (unsigned) editorial about last week's deal between Fatah and Hamas. Back in September 1993, Yasser Arafat made a commitment to renounce terrorism. The commitment was an essential element in getting the PLO legitimacy. Arafat, of course, didn't observe that commitment and for the past 17 1/2 years various fictions have been employed to excuse the PLO's failure to change. But for all the hand wringing over the importance of the peace process, I would have thought that an action that contradicts the very premise of the peace process would occasion an objection or two from those folks who spout off on just about any topic.

On Shabbos, a friend of mine pointed that the Baltimore Sun had a decent editorial. He was right. It's not perfect but Best of Enemies makes some good points:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/editorial/bs-ed-palestinians-20110430,0,1976577.story

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict underwent another evolution this week when the Fatah-backed Palestinian National Authority, which controls the West Bank, and Hamas, the radical Islamic movement that rules the Gaza Strip, announced they would put aside their differences to make common cause for an independent Palestinian state. Whether the two groups can really end years of mutual enmity and distrust remains to be seen, but the mere fact that they are talking about cooperating again could spell trouble for U.S. diplomacy in the region.

4) Whither Fayyadism?
Thomas Friedman some time ago praised Fayyadism:

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is to the wider Middle East what off-Broadway is to Broadway. It is where all good and bad ideas get tested out first. Well, the Palestinian prime minister, Salam Fayyad, a former I.M.F. economist, is testing out the most exciting new idea in Arab governance ever. I call it “Fayyadism.” Fayyadism is based on the simple but all-too-rare notion that an Arab leader’s legitimacy should be based not on slogans or rejectionism or personality cults or security services, but on delivering transparent, accountable administration and services.Fayyad, a former finance minister who became prime minister after Hamas seized power in Gaza in June 2007, is unlike any Arab leader today. He is an ardent Palestinian nationalist, but his whole strategy is to say: the more we build our state with quality institutions — finance, police, social services — the sooner we will secure our right to independence. I see this as a challenge to “Arafatism,” which focused on Palestinian rights first, state institutions later, if ever, and produced neither.

Now of course with the deal between Fatah and Hamas, along with Hamas's insistence that Fayyad not be part of the future government; it's reasonable to ask what will become of Fayyadism?

Given that Friedman, from his perch on the NYTimes op-ed and his pose as an authority on the Middle East, it's odd that he hasn't commented on the sidelining of Fayyad, which he presented as an essential element of peace in the Middle East.

Compare that silence with his quick, obnoxious reaction to the Israeli announcement of building in Ramat Shlomo, Driving Drunk in Jerusalem, which began:

I am a big Joe Biden fan. The vice president is an indefatigable defender of U.S. interests abroad. So it pains me to say that on his recent trip to Israel, when Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu’s government rubbed his nose in some new housing plans for contested East Jerusalem, the vice president missed a chance to send a powerful public signal: He should have snapped his notebook shut, gotten right back on Air Force Two, flown home and left the following scribbled note behind: “Message from America to the Israeli government: Friends don’t let friends drive drunk. And right now, you’re driving drunk. You think you can embarrass your only true ally in the world, to satisfy some domestic political need, with no consequences? You have lost total contact with reality. Call us when you’re serious. We need to focus on building our country.” 

Friedman argued further:

This whole fracas also distracts us from the potential of this moment: Only a right-wing prime minister, like Netanyahu, can make a deal over the West Bank; Netanyahu’s actual policies on the ground there have helped Palestinians grow their economy and put in place their own rebuilt security force, which is working with the Israeli Army to prevent terrorism; Palestinian leaders Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad are as genuine and serious about working toward a solution as any Israel can hope to find; Hamas has halted its attacks on Israel from Gaza; with the Sunni Arabs obsessed over the Iran threat, their willingness to work with Israel has never been higher, and the best way to isolate Iran is to take the Palestinian conflict card out of Tehran’s hand. 

Well Abbas, with his Hamas deal shows how "genuine and serious" he is about making peace with Israel. And maybe Fayyad is both, but he also is politically irrelevant. And now he's been forced from the picture. How about Driving Drunk in Ramallah?

"I need to sound a powerful signal to the Palestinian Authority: Since Barack Obama was elected you have failed to negotiate in good faith with Israel, relying instead on American pressure to get concession you want. Now you've made a deal with the devil, Hamas. "Message from Tom Friedman to the Palestinian Authority: Friends don't friends drive drunk. And right now, you're driving drunk. You think you can embarrass one of your many fans in journalism to satisfy some domestic political need, with no consequences? You have lost total contact with reality. Call me when you’re serious so I can write you more press releases. We need to focus on building our country.” 

The charitable explanation is that Friedman doesn't deal well with being proven wrong and prefers to ignore his failures. The not so charitable explanation is that he's thinking of some way of blaming this on Netanyahu.

And this is precious, Fayyad asks 'international community' to intervene over money transfer 


The legitimacy of the PLO was based on its renunciation of terror. The funds Israel has stopped transferring were part of the agreement. So the Palestinian Authority flouts the agreement and its President - the guy who Hamas wants out of power - complains to the international community that Israel is reacting sanely to the unilateral Palestinian violation of the treaty! It would be funny, but the international community will probably listen to him even though it will then be rewarding Palestinian unilateralism and support for terror!

Technorati Tag: Osama Bin Ladin and Middle East.