Mideast Media Sampler 05/04/2011

From an email from DG:

1) Trashing Thomas  

Thomas Friedman writes in Farewell to Geronimo

In paragraph 2, he gives us a patented Friedmanism|:

We did our part. We killed Bin Laden with a bullet. Now the Arab and Muslim people have a chance to do their part — kill Bin Ladenism with a ballot — that is, with real elections, with real constitutions, real political parties and real progressive politics. 

Notice the parallel construction and the juxtaposition of "bullet" and "ballot."


Have you noticed how well those ballots have worked recently?
1996 brought us Yasser Arafat. 2006 brought Hamas to power.
Elections in Lebanon gave Hezbollah significant power to the point that it was recently able to force Prime Minister Saad Hariri out and bring in a more pliable candidate Nijab Mikati.
The Muslim Brotherhood has announced a new political party to compete in Egyptian elections. It will likely gain enough power to influence the writing of a constitution and the policies of any elected government.

In other words other than the sophomoric wordplay, Friedman is saying, "I hope, against all available evidence, that it would work out." This is less hard hitting analysis than a wish list.

One other notable feature of Friedman's column is something that can be expected nearly anytime he writes about the Middle East: Israel bashing.

For decades, though, the Arab leaders were very adept at taking all that anger brewing out back and redirecting it onto the United States and Israel. Yes, Israel’s own behavior at times fed the Arab sense of humiliation and powerlessness, but it was not the primary cause. No matter. While the Chinese autocrats said to their people, “We’ll take away your freedom and, in return, we’ll give you a steadily rising education and standard of living,” the Arab autocrats said, “We’ll take away your freedom and give you the Arab-Israel conflict.” 

Since the signing of the Oslo Accords, Israel has given the Palestinians territory, financial aid and even a chance at self-government. The Palestinians have squandered all this - cheered on by the likes of Friedman - but is that how Israel "...fed the Arab sense of humiliation and powerlessness?" Why not acknowledge that? Why not acknowledge that despite making significant risky concessions, Israel hasn't been rewarded with peace but with the "Aqsa intifada," and rocket attacks from Gaza and southern Lebanon? Apparently Friedman sees his job as justifying the Arab sense of grievance rather than exposing its hollowness.

2) Jiving Jimmy 

I've noted before that neither the New York Times nor Washington Post has weighed in with unsigned editorials on the Hamas Fatah agreement. Today the Washington Post allows a writer who is identified as

The writer was the 39th president of the United States. He founded the not-for-profit Carter Center, which seeks to advance peace and health worldwide.

an op-ed. For some reason that doesn't mention that "advancing peace" includes ensuring that tyrants like Yasser Arafat and Hugo Chavez can call stolen elections legitimate.

Or that it means condemning his own country from the tyranny that is North Korea.

Here are the concluding paragraphs:

Suspicions of Hamas stem from its charter, which calls for Israel’s destruction. I find the charter repugnant. Yet it is worth remembering that Israel negotiated the Oslo Accords with the Palestine Liberation Organization while its charter had similar provisions. It took five more years before the PLO Charter was altered. Many Israelis say that as long as the Palestinians are divided, there is no partner for peace. But at the same time, they refuse to accept a unity government. In Cairo this week, the Palestinians are choosing unity. It is a fragile unity, but the Quartet should work with them to make it secure and peaceful enough to jump-start final-status negotiations with Israel.

First of all it isn't at all clear that the Palestinians revoked the elements of their charter that denies Israel's legitimacy. Even now, the "moderates" of Fatah refuse to acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state. Second of all, Fatah, under Arafat, hardly behaved like a "peace partner" turning a blind eye to terror against Israel or even encouraging it whenever it suited Arafat. Even now, with Abbas in charge, Fatah still glorifies terrorism. Finally Hamas now is demanding that Fatah revoke its agreement with Israel.

Anyway, it isn't just Hamas's charter. Hamas has continued firing rockets into Israel and is re-arming. The question shouldn't be why Israel won't accept a Fatah-Hamas agreement but rather why anyone who claims to want peace won't condemn Abbas's blatant violation of previous commitments by making common cause with an unapologetic terrorist group.

Technorati Tag: Middle East.