Sunday, April 29, 2012

Thomas Friedman, "Words of the Prophets": The Borat School of Journalism

Thomas Friedman begins his latest New York Times op-ed,"Words of the Prophets" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/opinion/sunday/friedman-words-of-the-prophets.html), by alluding to the lyrics of a 1964 hit single written by Simon & Garfunkel:

"AS I walk around the streets of Beirut, that verse from 'The Sounds of Silence' keeps rattling around in my head: 'The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls, and tenement halls ...'"

Friedman is one of the Middle East "experts" upon whom Obama places his trust (see: http://www.tnr.com/article/tel-aviv-journal/88563/obama-middle-east-zakaria-friedman-israel)? Lord help us. Meaningful understanding of political currents does not derive from waltzing into and out of Beirut, or for that matter, Cairo, and conveying to one's readership a "stream of consciousness" gathered from graffiti, i.e. akin to the would-be style of journalism evidenced by Sacha Baron Cohen's Borat in his travels across the US.

Friedman writes:

"But what to do about Syria’s uprising? Let’s start by putting it in historical context. What is happening in Syria, and across the Arab world today, is the first popular movement since the late 19th and early 20th century that has not been animated by foreign policy or anticolonialism or Israel or Britain."

Wrong. Friedman ignores Lebanon's 2005 Cedar Revolution, which occurred following the assassination of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri by Hezbollah at the direction of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and which resulted in the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon.

Friedman also forgets the 1982 Hama Massacre perpetrated by Syrian President, Hafez al-Assad, Bashar's father, to quell a revolt by Sunni Muslims. The estimated number of civilians who died in this bloodbath ranges from 10,000 to 40,000.

Friedman continues:

"Syrian opposition activists here in Beirut make clear that Assad opened fire on unarmed demonstrators, hoping to provoke a violent backlash. Then he could argue that this was not a peaceful democratic revolt but a sectarian revolt by Syria’s Sunni Muslim majority, aimed at ousting Assad’s ruling Alawite/Shiite minority and its allies. To some degree, it worked: Now we have a democratic struggle intertwined with a sectarian one."

A "democratic struggle intertwined with a sectarian one"? Oh, please! Democracy has absolutely nothing to do with what is happening in Syria. Syria's Muslim Brotherhood is the spiritual force behind the rebellion of Syria's Sunnis, comprising some 70% of the population, and Western-style democratic values are not part and parcel of the Islamic fundamentalist underpinnings of the Brotherhood's political philosophy. Also, the chaos in Syria was precipitated by unemployment caused by a multi-year drought that has wrecked havoc with Syria's agriculture, combined with the depletion of Syria's oil resources. Again, democracy has nothing to do with this revolt.

Friedman goes on to say that if U.N. envoy Kofi Annan’s plan to place 300 Arab observers inside Syria fails, "then the West, the United Nations and the Arab League need to move swiftly to set up a no-fly zone or humanitarian corridor," and concludes:

"So let’s help in an intelligent, humane way, but with no illusions that this transition will be easy or a happy ending assured."

No mention by Friedman that Assad still has the backing of Syria's Alawite minority, which expects savage revenge from the Sunni Muslim majority, if their leader, Bashar al-Assad, falls, i.e. the Alawites are not going to lay down their arms anytime soon. In addition, Assad has the backing of Russia's Putin, who was promised cooperation by Obama after November as overheard in his open microphone gaffe (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2012/03/obamas-open-mike-chat-with-medvedev-yes.html). And Assad has the support of Iran's Khamenei, also being appeased by Obama (see, most recently, Obama's readiness to concede to Iranian enrichment of uranium up to 5% : http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-nuclear-20120428,0,353079.story), who is not about to withdraw support for a regime through which his support of Iran's proxy in Lebanon, Hezbollah, flows.

"So let’s help in an intelligent, humane way"? Sorry, but Obama has chosen to ignore this hot potato, which can only interfere with his reelection bid, particularly given his complicity and ongoing refusal to intervene in this tragedy (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2012/04/new-york-times-editorial-assads-lies-no.html).

1 comment:

  1. I agree with you. I was thinking ...
    The incompetent rely on the incompetent.
    One of my favorite themes is "killing" of respect for knowledge and expertise in the country I live now (US) and think that both right and left have contributed to this sad demise. Obama was elected by the nation which learned to judge people superficially (smile, firm handshake, looking into eyes, pretty words) and which is not familiar with such concepts as demagoguery and sloganeering. Moreover, the same nation was told that people in charge don't have to know anything, since they can hire experts and they are there on top ... for what exactly? How can someone without any knowledge make the right personnel decisions? So, probably, other criteria enter the picture. So, what our friend of Reverend Jeremiah Wright and Samantha Power takes into consideration when making appointments and ... judgments?

    ReplyDelete