During his recent visit to the U.S. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said he would never make peace with Hamas. That is like saying that the U.S. will never make peace with North Korea, Iran or Soviet Russia.

Making peace with one’s enemies is a necessary part of responsible governance.  Engaging one’s enemies on the field of battle is easy. Engaging them in diplomacy and negotiation is the test of true leadership.

I am the son of a Jew and a staunch defender of Israel’s right to exist in peace and security.  I am also an American that has had about all he can stand of Imperial Israel.

As president Obama is embroiled in domestic battles over health reform and the war in Afghanistan, he cannot afford to burn the political candle at both ends. So it is not expected that a hard-line stance will be postured toward Israel – yet.  But soon; very soon, I expect the Obama administration to announce an alliance with the Palestinians that will shake the very foundations of Israeli-U.S. relations.

And it’s about friggin’ time.

If the Obama administration does not, it will be because of a political fire storm – not a matter of right or wrong.

In many ways, I tend to agree with Netanyahu. Hamas is a bunch of organized crime jerks that have more invested in their protection racket in Gaza than in the fate and hopes of the Palestinian people. Like many in the Middle East, Hamas brokers power from its opposition to Israel.  And power is money. Power is influence.  A cessation of hostility means a cessation of power.

Israel can reduce Hamas’ power by giving aid and comfort to the average Palestinian. By agreeing to non-aggression packs and dealing with Hamas as a ‘hostel entity’ but nevertheless deal with them and pursue agreements that dilute Hamas’ power. They instead strengthen Hamas by taking an imperial approach to dealings. And it is neither in their best interest or the Palestinian people’s best interest to do so.

If Israel took the position that they would “Deal with the Devil” if it meant a secure and prosperous Middle East… they would find many more options for dealing with Hamas than they find today.

Hamas will be its own destruction when Israel is no longer a threat to a Palestinian state. The same is true of Hezbollah, Iran and other extremists. An aggressive and assertive push for an autonomous Palestinian state will pull the legs out from under Israel’s staunchest foes. The U.S. and the E.U. will champion any attempt to create such a state. Israel could ‘steamroll’ its enemies with a powerful diplomatic agenda.

But alas, they will not. Because they are so near-sighted and narcissistic, they will push some of their most avid supports into guarantees of security for a Palestinian state. If they do not move to make such guarantees themselves, the U.S. and E.U. may very well have to do so unilaterally.

JB

More to Read:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/22/obama-lays-groundwork-peace-israel-palestinians/

In current events, Manuel Zelaya, the democratically elected president of Honduras, was exiled by his country’s military in the dead of night. Extracted from his home and flown to neighboring Costa Rica, the president was said to be in violation of constitutional law. Both the national congress and judiciary are said to have supported the move. To many, this was justification for the actions of the Honduran military. The quick condemnation by Western leaders, including Obama, is seen as duplicitous by many right wing pundits.

The point here is… The Rule of Law did not prevail. If Zelaya broke the law, as the Honduran congress and courts say he did, the chief legal authority should have him arrested. Or the congress should impeach him. He should stand trial for his crimes in a court of law and the public provided with evidence of his crimes – and he with a vigorous defense.

Rather than arrest or impeachment, he was deposed and exiled… this is not a democratic process.

It is not a matter of guilt; nor if he is a good administrator or not; or if he is “right wing” or “left wing” politically. It is a question of due process – of which he was denied. That is the issue.

In a broader sense, Obama, and many other democratic governments are indeed obliged to object on these grounds alone. Left unchallenged, this type of behavior returns us to the hypocritical and deceitful practices of Viet Nam, Iran, the Cold War and Iraq. Wherein the overthrow or disposition of any leader that did not suit our national interests was seen as acceptable – without regard to form of government – democratic or otherwise.

We must, as global libertarians, begin to acknowledge that not all democratic processes will deliver the kind of government – or the type of leaders – the Western democracies embrace. But if we truly wish to influence the world’s indigenous populations to seek democratic governance, we must accept their will at the ballot box. Human nature is as human nature does.

Bad leaders will ALWAYS emerge. The totalitarians will emerge quickly. Like Chavez, Zeleya, Castro and the like, they will move to change the constitution or empower “president for life” manifestos. From there the ‘management’ of free elections to the will of the governing elite is always next. Even the most democratic and freest of nations can have bad leaders.

We must have faith that the process of democracy will eventually prevail.

In Geneva, Switzerland this week a political football known as the UN Antiracism Conference (or more precisely: The Conference on “Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance”) – is an example of a much needed dialog hijacked by special interests; namely, religious and cultural leaders.

The first UN Antiracism Conference was held in Durban, South Africa in September 2001. Since that time it has been stuck in a political quagmire. The fact that the UN is more of a pulpit than a forum for debate was never more evident than this 8 year struggle to define racism and discrimination.

It can be argued, that there is no other nation that has more experience dealing with racism – past and present – than the United States. So when they declined not to attend or endorse the “agreement” drafted for the conference, I decided to give this a look-see and try to understand the debate.

I think even the youngest child in the U.S. can understand racism. Not so the U.N., apparently.

Your race or gender is a consequence of birth rather than choice, culture or indoctrination. Such cultural or personal choices as religious beliefs, sexual beliefs and moral bearing, cannot, by their very definition, be addressed by a global standard of right and wrong.

In an effort to address every problem in the world – for every interest in the world – the U.N. once again misses the point. Racism and sexism are real. The reason they are so profound a problem is evident in the arguments of the special interests in the racism debate itself. Political interests want to pit religious beliefs and economic classes against each other in the name of racism.  If you do not accept our culture or abide by our religious laws,  you are racist.  It is postulated by several influential religious interests, that if one’s religion says one is allowed to be sexist or raciest or to discriminate – within their common law -  then that trumps all other arguments.  

The fact the U.S., and other nations, are boycotting this conference – rather than give it the legitimacy it does not deserve – is the proper choice in my opinion.  The only way the U.N. can now extract itself from the mess it’s gotten itself into, is to develop separate conferences. One on racial and sexual discrimination; and another on intolerance of belief, culture and personal choice. We could then see a more uniform argument on the issues facing humanity, rather than only the issues facing those that wish to control humanity.

This separation will never happen of course. The U.N. is not designed to be effective; it is designed to give political voice to those who would not otherwise be heard. A noble goal, I believe, but not very pragmatic if solutions are to be gained. It’s that whole “management by committee” thing that never results in effective governance.

Since so many of the problems of global racism are rooted in cultural and religious belief, I’m not sure we will ever adequately address the key root causes of discrimination: religious dogma and cultural tradition.  Not until John Lennon’s “Imagine” – a world without walls, religions and countries -  will we find the plateau on which humanity may one day stand.  I fear many deaths and much pain await us between now and that day.

JB

Current News:

CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/04/19/racism.conference/index.html

BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8006852.stm

Al Jazeera: http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/04/200941982836646130.html

As I type this, the Palestinian people are once again having to endure fear and death from the never ending power struggle between Hamas and Israel.  I am of Jewish descent and my views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are well known to those who follow my writings (http://aberantnews.org/?p=32).  And, while I feel much of the burden of violence and hate in Gaza are manifested by the radical right of the Palestinian politic – I cannot help but think much of the violence and distrust in the region is also the fault of Israeli right wingers as well.

A staunch supporter of Israel’s right to exist, I often wonder how Israelis would feel if the roles were reversed.  If the Palestinians were given the right of sovereignty over the land of Canaan – and it was Israel that was pushed onto the edge of global society. The Palestinians have as much claim to this territory as do the Jews.  Remove the power zealots from each camp, and the two have the same roots in Abraham and the rule of law as children of the book.

Once upon a time Palestine was the jewel of the Middle East. Will it ever return to its former glory? Is the quest for martyrdom taught by the power mongers of Islam going to be the death of all that was great and good in Palestine?  Are the Zionists that preach dominion over all the Arab lands going to make Israel the global symbol of intolerance and hubris?

I sit here today, a Jew in genetics only, trying to understand the tactics of Israel.  The never ending, unguided, poorly designed rocket fire from Hamas was more a reminder of political failure than it was a threat to life and limb.  In the last 10 years nearly 6,000 rockets have been fired and less than a couple dozen Jewish casualties had resulted. So, militarily speaking, the Hamas rockets were of little threat. More people died of auto accidents in Israel than Hamas rockets. As a military tactic, the latest attack of Gaza by the IDF is analogous to swatting flies with a sledge hammer.  More Israeli casualties will result – and far more Palestinian & Islamic hate will result – from this assault than all the Palestinian rockets could cause over the last 10 years.

So who is giving the advice in Israel?  Don’t they know that generous food and humanitarian aid to Gaza would trump Hamas’ grip on the population there? But then, who in the Islamic world are secretly hoping that Hamas will be eliminated? Surely Fatah has much to gain if Hamas is broken. Egypt, Jordan and others fear the tactics of Hamas as a means to an end.  But then, so do I.  It’s my opinion that most of Hamas is a bunch of power hungry organized crime figures that are holding 1.5 million people psychological hostage. I’m not alone in that assessment, even right wing Arabs and Hezbollah insiders think poorly of Hamas. But when Israel attacks Gaza Hamas becomes stronger.

Israel has many enemies. They are the favorite target of any Muslim that wants to become powerful – either politically or religiously.  But in truth, if the Muslims did not have the Jews to hate, they would simply hate each other. Many more Muslims would die at the hands of other Muslims if the ‘Zionist” common enemy were not there.

Ok, so much for sharing blame… what is the answer?  The elimination of Jews? The elimination of Palestinians?   All of you that think either of these is a workable solution raise your hands… then leave this blog. Because you are part of the problem. You will never be part of the solution.

For the rest of you, let’s try this; Israel: insure that all Palestinians have food, clothing shelter and justice. Yea, justice. Like giving back the land and liberty they once had – before they listened to the other Arabs of the region and screwed everything up (circa 1948). Long lived occupations, embargos and blockades only serve to empower your enemies and punish the innocent.  Palestine: You have made your point. The Zionist land-grab of 1947 was unfair. Life is unfair. The native Indians of the U.S. lost an area 400 times that of Israel.  Get over it. History is not kind. You have children and grandchildren to think about.  Stop putting your trust in Hamas and start demanding justice and the countries of the world Will stand by you!

Every time someone tells you to take up arms against another… stop right there. Whether Israel, Palestine, Hezbollah, Iran, Iraq, the USA,… makes No Difference; dictatorship or democracy, monarchy or theocracy – no form of government is immune to the corruption of power. We should all live by the same standard – giving each other the same respect and allow each to live, worship and behave as if we had to live on this planet together forever.

This may all sound naively ideological to many, but we are becoming a Global society. Economies are global; the internet & communications are global; resources are global; politics is soon to be global; … we are no longer a world of isolated people, cultures and deeds. We are in the infancy of an information technology driven world order now.  Those that understand and influence this new order will reign in perpetuity.

JB

Sources & References

Annonomus (2009). Protests mount as Israel unleashes ground forces, New Zealand Herald, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10550483

Paul Beaver (2009). War amongst the people, Al Jazeera, retrieved January 3, 2009, from: http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/war_on_gaza/2009/01/200913772015547.html

Sultan Al-Qassem (2009). Hamas must step down as Gaza’s keeper, The Daily Star, retrieved January 6, 2009, from: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=5&article_id=98859

Recently president-elect Obama’s transition team sent email to the party faithful asking that they go to their www.change.gov website and postulate on their “Vision” of what American can be. Now, I don’t know if this is just good political theater, or if each and every response will actually be given due consideration. Probably somewhere in between. Nevertheless, I am always up for a challenge so I thought I’d give this a try.

Definition of a “Vision”

So what is a “Vision” anyway? Among the definitions of “Vision” put forth by Princeton University’s web dictionary are:

• A vivid mental image; “he had a vision of his own death“;
• sight: the ability to see; the visual faculty, “His vision is 20/20”;
• the perceptual experience of seeing; “the runners emerged from the trees into his clear vision“; “he had a visual sensation of intense light“;
• imagination: the formation of a mental image of something that is not perceived as real and is not present to the senses; “popular imagination created a world of demons“; “imagination reveals what the world could be“;
• a religious or mystical experience of a supernatural appearance; “he had a vision of the Virgin Mary“.

So a vision can range from fantasy to science to observation and back. Give a writer that much ground and you could end up with almost anything. However, I will try to keep my “visions” in the context of the political – categorized using the Obama team “Agenda”.

• Revitalizing the Economy
• Ending the War in Iraq
• Providing Health Care for All
• Protecting America
• Renewing American Global Leadership

The Economy

It seems as though every major economic FUBAR in the last 200 years was perpetuated by government. Not by government regulation – but government deregulation and meddling in business operations. Recessionary influence comes from debt/deflation reactions. When government influences poor business decisions (push sub-prime ARM mortgages – then follow with higher prime rates) and encourage over speculation (remove regulations on credit default swaps, etc.) they establish the environment of crisis.

It does not stop with Wall Street or financial institutions. Such poor political decisions as allowing corn ethanol subsidies and disallowing zero emission electric vehicle subsidies (Calif – 2000)– shows that government is still engaged in the practice of trying to generate wealth rather than competition. A very bad idea in a free market economy. Government is the biggest factor in ‘un-leveling’ the free economy playing field and it must stop soon. A global free market economy will not stand for long if governments get in the way of the process. Just as with a professional baseball game, the umpires and referees are there to see that the game is played by the rules – but they should not influence the outcome of the contest. Government is here to establish and enforce the rules – from there on out the players of the game need to stand or fall on their own merit. Bailouts only perpetuate the bad play of the contestants.

Economic recovery is embodied in many of the initiatives about which the president elect has opined. Energy solutions, infrastructure repair and improvement, ecology requirements and re-creating jobs are paramount. But when the government becomes the key de facto job producer and employer, there comes a threat to – once again – create an imbalance in the free market opportunities of business.

And lastly, let’s stop the political B.S. about energy. We are not stupid. Corn ethanol is a BAD idea; there is no such thing as Clean Coal; Hydrogen is not a panacea for energy solutions; and even if we had an abundance of energy creation – our national delivery grid is ancient and technically obsolete.  Petroleum will run out in 30 years (or at least it will be too expensive to ‘burn’ as fuel).  Scientists say CO2 will be at dangerous levels within 80 years. Do the math. Spend our national resources where it makes sense.

Actions: Suggested actions to restore a free market vision for America: Repeal the Commodity Futures Modernization Act; phase out Freddie & Fannie completely; flatten out the tax code; allow free enterprise to determine the best next energy solution; get “shovel ready” infrastructure projects underway immediately; stop funding ‘operations’ like corn ethanol production and start funding ‘research and development’ – like better battery technology, lower cost nuclear energy solutions and natural gas storage methods; to name only a few.

War in Iraq – and Elsewhere

While the war in Iraq is thankfully winding down – as it should not have been started in the first place – Afghanistan looms as our next great FUBAR. More troops may not be the answer. More economic and educational aid may prove – pound for pound – more influential than ammunition.

Pushing Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters into Iran and Pakistan has its own set of potentials that may be worse than the disease. It appears that Islamic fundamentalists throughout the region out number democratic moderates. At least they are more prone to action, so it seems that they number more. If only we could mobilize the moderates….

Back in Iraq, our draw-down there is seen as inevitable. But the pressures on the fledgling democracy of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki are such that – without the powerful military of the U.S. to quell unrest – a power struggle will ensue and Obama may be forced to redeploy combat troops if he is not careful. I’m not sure that a coup or civil war in Iraq can be ignored by the U.S. due to the destabilizing influence of Iran in the region.

This bed was made by Bush – but Obama will have to sleep in it.

Actions: Suggested actions to restore a ‘world peace’ vision for America: Engage in dialog and technology exchange with fundamentalist political groups. Education and knowledge will trump cultural dogma every time – given enough time. Infrastructure, schools and free trade improvements will bolster democratic governance. Use force only where life and liberty are in eminent danger. This goes hand in hand with the Global Leadership role the U.S. needs to reassert. When in Vietnam we Marines often complained about the “do not fire until fired upon” rule of engagement. However, in our own way we were somewhat proud that we where held to a different standard than our foe. It is not a weakness to hold humanity in high regard, even while others do not. Especially when others do not.

National Health Care Reform

I have been on the front “side line” of this for some time. I wanted to be on the front line, but my proposals never gained much momentum. My proposal was to establish a non-profit organization that was funded by government grants as a start-up, and then self funding over time. Investors are not all that excited about non-profit funding and the government seemed disinterested since I did not have any academic sponsorship.

First a little background. My wife is a nurse; her father a retired surgeon; her mother an RN. I have heard all the stories. On the other hand, I am an information technology (IT) professional by trade  (www.jwbennett.info). I’m one of those misguided individuals that think IT can help address any problem.

After hearing all the family war stories of how medical practitioners are forced in ever increasing numbers to abandon insurance networks and controls in favor of cash-services – and looking at the staggering number of people without health insurance, the long lines at emergency rooms, and so on – I had a thought. Let’s do a typical IT “Business Analyst” review of the average heath provider. Where do they spend their money; where do they spend their time; where do they make their money, and lastly, how do we measure success of the product or service offering?

My analysis led me to several conclusions. First, by far the most time and money is spent on record keeping. Patient records, insurance records and regulatory record keeping took 60% of the effort of a heath provider. None of which are particularly beneficial to the financial success of the enterprise. In typical IT Analyst fashion, I deduced that automating – or removing – much of this record keeping burden was essential to lowering cost and improving productivity of health providers.

The problem, of course is HIPPA. Not the Act, per se, but the processing and management of patient records by a 3^rd party is problematic. Answer – do HIPPA one better. Put the patient in charge of the record keeping (with considerable help from a secure internet based application that does the heavy lifting).

Next problem – who owns, controls and administers the internet application and database? An insurance company? The government? Hummm.. Any for-profit enterprise or government entity could have conflicts of interest that would strain the intent of HIPPA. So, the only answer I saw was a Non-Profit corporation that had considerable oversight by the government, the healthcare industry and the insurance companies. The internet program application must have considerable benefit for all – including, and foremost, for the patient. Tall order.

Beyond just electronic record keeping, this “Medical Registry Organization” (MRO) would provide ANSI-type standards for record interchange and security. The patient or his/her designate would determine which records were public, which were private, which were available in emergency, which providers has access to what, and so on.

Actions: Suggested actions to provide a ‘universal healthcare’ vision for America: The answer lies in offloading the recordkeeping burden to the record owner. Until the records burden is addressed costs will not moderate – for the taxpayer or the government. Just as banks used ATM’s to offload teller workloads to the account owners (decreasing cost and increasing productivity & profit dramatically, I might add); health care record management can be also offloaded to the patient. Every insurance or for-profit industry “electronic records” initiative will fail in the end due to competitive and regulatory pressures. An independent non-profit organization or “institute” is the only reasonable answer. Health care reform should also look at the many agencies and departments of government that are charged with health and welfare oversight (some 20 agencies in HHS plus EPA, OSHA, USDA,…) and try to rationalize and/or consolidate data, technology, personnel and facilities into a more robust and functional public health organization.

Protecting America

Homeland security has most of its resources focused on the prevention of terrorism. But the fact is most of the death and destruction the average citizen will face comes not from terrorists, but from nature and human error. Considering the money spent to date on homeland security, we have little to show for it. Katrina showed us what real homeland security should be – but was not. Beyond prevention, security means good threat assessment and effective first response.

As most intelligent travelers will tell you, the security show TSA puts on at the nation’s airports is nothing short of pageantry. It is there to instill a sense of security in the public – nothing else. Actually, the single reason 9/11 could not be repeated today is that airlines are now required to secure the cockpit door. It has little, if anything, to do with the TSA’s elaborate security threat detection methods. I could make a belt out of C4 explosive and walk on any plane in all but 4 or 5 airports in the U.S.. No problem. Any nonmetallic weapon can be taken on board almost any aircraft by almost anyone. And if you think this is news to any would-be terrorist, forget it. They already know. But since they cannot use the aircraft as a weapon any longer (and since the average American passenger is more attentive now days), they will move to softer targets.

By far the most effective anti-terrorism activities have been those we hear only rumors about. Communications monitoring & analysis, elaborate pattern matching, decryption methods and other technologies used by the NSA have done more to spoil would-be threats than all the long TSA lines put together. Add to that the efforts to remove the terrorist network money supply, and I think we could have decommissioned every metal detector in the US and been just fine. Ok, maybe that is a little irrational, but not by much.

Actions: Suggested actions for a “secure” vision for America: The DHS is a great idea, but its focus is upside-down. The TSA is at the top of the heap with regard to funding and influence, when it should be FEMA. Keep up the good work at NSA and CIA. Keep the DOD out of DHS programs. I’ve heard rumors of bills floating around congress to deploy federal troops to “assist” local law enforcement in the event of ”emergency”. Hummm. If the National Guard or state and local police are not properly trained or equipped, then fix it. Leave federal troops out of homeland security contingencies.

Renewing American Global Leadership

Without a doubt we have already made progress in this area. Just by electing president-elect Obama, Americans have reached across the cultural and economic gulf of world opinion. But we cannot rest on that laurel.

When we think of global leadership we think of the Middle East, Russia, Africa, Asia… but we also need to consider Mexico, Latin America and Canada. Of all our international dealings, our dealings with American states and border states should be improved first.

Under the Bush doctrine we have seen a major shift to the left in Latin America and an increase in organized drug crime in Mexico. While I too fear a nuclear Iran, I fear more a destabilized government in Mexico. If push came to shove, the Israelis are more than capable of handling a threat from Iran. Mexico however has many infrastructure, education and economic issues – exacerbated by U.S. immigration policy – that have a greater potential to affect the U.S.. You want to restore the U.S. leadership? Start by addressing the Mexican immigration issue.

Outside the Americas, a global economy – enriched by a global information technology network – is moving at breakneck pace. The welfare of everyone is starting to be influenced by everyone else. This will require – in time – a new look at not only national policy – but global policy and global governance. The U.N. is a political football and pretty much as effective as any organization run my committee. But, it is all we really have right now, so let’s see what we can do over the next four years to give it some balls (excuse the vernacular). Darfur, Guinea, Burma, Zimbabwe, et al – little action to deter genocide and massive rights violations. I think there is a place for an “international police force” but they must have the mandate, the training and the equipment to do the job.

Actions: Suggested actions to restore a “global leadership” vision for America: Start with immigration reforms and boarder state relations. Want to stop the march of leftist ideology in Latin America? Lift the Cuban embargo. Engage in open and frequent dialog with other states. Encourage political dissent and policy arguments. Often, if you get the other party talking enough, they reveal the REAL reason for their conduct. And it is usually power related. Give them ‘perceived power’ and they will be your friend for life. And sanctions rarely work either. Not in Cuba, not in Iran, not in Palestine. They only tend to push our adversaries closer together. Let’s try something different. How about open trade, domestic technology transfer, cultural influence, free and open dialog,… What a novel idea!

Lastly, I believe the U.N. is a fine place to voice opinion and do some political wrestling, but no where near a venue for pursuing global peace or justice. At least give it the mandate to do good independent international intelligence gathering so the true cause and affects of actions can be understood by all.  In my fantasy vision of a new world order I have a list of “what ifs”: What if Interpol became an agency of the U.N.? What if the G10 shared threat assessments with them? What if we established a full volunteer U.N. Police & Peacekeeping force?  What if we sponsored a movement to establish an international language?  A language not spoken by any permanent member of the Security Counsel; like Spanish?  What if, indeed. Too far out maybe?  Mark my words, the day may come when the U.N, yes the U.N., is our last best hope.  Woodrow Wilson’s League of Nations vision was far ahead of its time.  But – with the advent of the internet, international free trade and economic symbiosis among nations – it’s time may have come.  Indeed,  the time to make it work may be moving right past us….

For what it’s worth.

JB

Sources:

Bennett, J. (2008a). BLOG: Replacing rhetoric with truth, Aberant News, Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://aberantnews.org/?p=51

Bennett, J. (2008b). BLOG: One Doctor’s Painful Decision, Aberant News, Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://aberantnews.org/?p=49

Bernanke, B. (1983). “Non-Monetary Effects of the Financial Crisis in the Propagation of the Great Depression”. THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW (The American Economic Association) 73 (3): 257-276.

CDS. (2008). Definition: Credit Default Swap. Wikipidia, retrieved October 25th, 2008 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_default_swap

Corn, D. (2008) Article: Foreclosure Phil, Mother Jones Magazine, August 2008, retrieved October 25th, 2008 from: http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2008/07/foreclosure-phil.html

Flat Tax. (2008). Countries that have flat tax systems; Wikipedia, retrieved October 25th, 2008 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax

Kroft, S. (2008). The bet that blew up wall street, CBS – 60 Minutes, retrieved October 27th, 2008 from:http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/26/60minutes/main4546199.shtml

Miron, J. (2008). Commentary: Bankruptcy, not bailout, is the right answer; CNN, retrieved September 29, 2008 from: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/29/miron.bailout/

Mishkin, F. (1978). “The Household Balance and the Great Depression”. Journal of Economic History 38: 918-37.

Mufson, S. (2007). Article: Oil price rise causes global shift in wealth; The Washington Post, retrieved October 25th, 2008 from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/09/AR2007110902573_pf.html

NOW. (2006). Transcript: Who killed the electric car?; Public Broadcasting Service (PBS); retrieved October 25th, 2008 from: http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/223.html

Paul. R. (2008). Article: monetary system is fraudulent; retrieved October 24th, CNN, 2008 from: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/24/ron.paul.economy/

Pickins, T. (2008). America is addicted to foreign oil; T. Boone Pickins; retrieved October 25th, 2008 from: http://www.pickensplan.com/theplan/

U.N. (2008). The United Nations, MSN Encarta Encyclopedia Online, Retrieved December 26, 2008, from: http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761564986/United_Nations.html

Vance, L. (2008); The Flat Tax Is Not Flat, NewAmerican, retrieved October 25th, 2008 from http://thenewamerican.com/economy/commentary-mainmenu-43/442

WordNet (2008). Definition: Vision, Princeton University WordNet, Retrieved December 26, 2008, from: http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=vision

A subject I have not broached until now, the controversial Missile Defense Shield (MDS) that the Bush administration ‘sold’ to the East European countries does not pass the smell test. The Russians see it for what it is – a rebuke of their recent push to reestablish themselves as a World Power.

Unfortunately the Bush administration still thinks that the average person on the street does not have a very good world view. Such fear tactics as “Weapons of Mass Destruction” can justify anything, even their obvious political hackery.

The recent flap over a MDS stationed in Poland is a good example of a government that is so lost in its own self-serving rhetoric that it makes very stupid and poorly conceived decisions.

The US has spent $60 billion since 2001on MDS and it has still not impressed even the most conservative hawks that it would be affective. Proposed to intercept missiles from Iran or other “rogue” states, the MDS has several very poorly thought out issues. Here are a few of the reasons why the MDS, as currently developed is not worth the deployment cost:

• As anyone who follows the science of the proposed MDS can attest, the system has faired poorly in tests. As frequently as October 2008 tests conducted on known targets, launched from known locations at known times intercepted short rang missiles only 50% of the time. Additionally, all test intercepts were attempted close to the launch points; on only short range targets; and never after a missile had reached long range ballistic range and speed. This does not bode well for a fixed installation 2,000 miles from the launch point (e.g. Poland).
• Using “Path” tool in Google Earth, the nearest intercept point to an Iranian launch toward NATO or the U.S. is Turkey (NATO partner). The next is Georgia. That would be interesting.  Assuming the systems worked as designed, a deployment in Turkey would protect all of the NATO countries (Poland, Ukraine, Spain, France, Italy & UK – from 1,000 to 2,500 miles). Whereas bases in Poland will only protect Poland, Sweden, Denmark northern portions of the UK and the US northeast (6,100 miles).
• To date all successful tests have been done at sea. And none on an actual warhead to determine if disabling the missile would actually disable the warhead. In other words, Poland (or its neighbor, Ukraine) could be ground zero for any missile they intercept in their airspace.
• No intelligence analysts believe Iran will have accurate long range capability in any case. As with Pakistan, short range targets in the Middle Eastern region is the goal of a deterrent or an offensive capability. Their “balance of power” aspect with regards to the U.S. will be served by threats to our allies.
• The U.S., Israel, and most NATO & Middle East countries agree that a nuclear capability in Iran is “unacceptable” and military options will be exercised in the event even one such weapon is deployed in Iran. They will never achieve the threat that the MDS is purported to counter.
• The more urgent and meaningful threat is that from Pakistan. If that countries government flips to a theocracy such as that in Iran, the stakes are much higher. But once again, they only possess short range capability today, and an Eastern Europe deployment of a MDS – far down range of a launch site – will be hard pressed to protect legacy NATO countries, India or Israel.

To anyone even slightly familiar with the technology, geography and politics here, it is obvious that the MDS deployment, as planned, is political folly and has little to do with effective defense.  And I take exception to anyone using $60billion of our tax dollars for folly.

Poland and the Czech Republic like it because the U.S. is spending much of its Billions in their country. NATO likes it because Eastern Europe does. And Bush likes it because Russia doesn’t.

In reality, the MDS only has value as a bargaining chip with the Russians. The money should be spent on other programs that beef up security of more subversive nuclear delivery systems, such as shipping containers and air freight.

JB

Sources:

Commander, U.S. Third Fleet. (2008). Navy Intercepts Ballistic Missile Target in Fleet Exercise Pacific Blitz, 3^rd Fleet Public Affairs Office, Retrieved November 9, 2008, from: http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/pdf/08news0082.pdf

Gard, R., Reif, K. (2008). Time To Rethink Missile Defense, The Center for Arms Control, Retrieved November 9, 2008, from: http://armscontrolcenter.org/policy/missiledefense/articles/102008_rethink_missile_defense/

Lamb, N. (2008). Article: Russian plan raises foreign policy stakes for Obama, The New Zealand Herald, Retrieved November 9, 2008, from: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10542069

I have Jewish heritage. Well, genetically speaking anyway. My natural Father was Jewish. But I hold a few views that my Jewish friends find objectionable.

I sincerely believe that Peace between Palestinians and Israelis is actually a pretty simple formula. “Do unto others as you are willing to have them do unto you.”

However, applying this simple principle has eluded the warring factions for 60 years.

Repatriation and Settlements

Neither side should demand of the other side that which they would not be able or willing to do themselves.

For instance, one of the biggest hurdles is the repatriation of Palestinians to territories in Israel and maintaining the Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory.

These are two sides of the very same coin.

If Palestinians wish to return to territories inside Israel, fine. Of course, as residents of a sovereign state they would have to live under the laws and within the jurisdiction of the Jewish State of Israel. Pay the taxes, learn the language, respect the customs and respect the culture of the host country.

If Israelis wish to live in Palestine – fine. Let them. Of course, as residents of a sovereign state they would have to live under the laws and within the jurisdiction of the Islamic State of Palestine. Pay the taxes, learn the language, respect the customs and respect the culture of the host country.

If that does not sit well with those that believe in a separation of church & state and the irrevocable right to self determination and freedom of religion – then don’t insist that your country be a “Jewish State” or an “Islamic State”. A Democratic State should suffice.

Like I said – a simple formula.

Both sides should easily see the other side’s point of view and both can see that they must work together to insure the safety and freedom of each other’s citizens. Until this simple principle of mutual respect and responsibility is adopted by both parties – a solution is simply not possible.

Jerusalem

While Jerusalem is the spiritual center for Judaism, it is not the spiritual center for Islam (Mecca is considered Islam’s spiritual capital). Conversely, Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel – Tel-Aviv is. The capital of Palestine has been Jerusalem since the end of the Crusades centuries ago.

This dichotomy makes this issue worrisome – but it is not a unique problem historically.

Just as Washington DC is not part of a State; and the Vatican is its own City State (as was Rome) within Italy; so then, I believe, should Jerusalem be a City State of its own. It’s as simple as that. How it is governed is not an issue. We have many models of City State governance from which to choose.

Jerusalem must be treated as an enclave of free movement and security. Sitting directly on the border of Israel & Palestine Jerusalem can be a Mecca (no pun intended) of cooperation and religious freedom. Of course this assumes the return of east Jerusalem lands to Palestine – for which there is adequate historic precedence.

If the Palestinians want to make it their capital – Fine. If the Israelis want to make it their Capital too – Fine. Just get on with it.

History

For the average person “on the street” in The West the history of this region is confusing.

The seemingly continuous fighting between Israelis and Palestinians has it roots not in the Middle East – but in New York City.

The truth is that the “partitioning” of the area known as Palestine – into Palestinian and Jewish States in 1948 – was a fabrication of the WWII Allies through the United Nations. After the horrors of the Holocaust were found to be actually true – the long standing Jewish request for a homeland was finally fulfilled.

While this was seen as a terribly unjust “land grab” by the Arab world (and maybe it was) the Arabs themselves made it worse by invading the new Jewish State of Israel in June of 1948 – immediately after Israel declared its independence and was recognized by the UN as a sovereign state in May of 1948.

[ A little known fact: The territory was under British rule up until that time. Several dozen British officers that were sympathetic to the Arabs in the region resigned their commissions in order to lead Arab armies against Israel. ]

However, the Allies considered the Arab nations to be in direct violation of the wishes of the U.N.; so, all the nations of the security counsel – from the U.S. to Russia and Britain, aided Israel with weapons and funds. Many battle hardened Jews that fought with the Allies in WW2 migrated to Israel as the threat of invasion was realized.

By the end of 1949 Israeli counter attacks pushed Arab armies out of their partitioned area of Palestine and expanded their land holdings by over 25%. This expansion included the western half of the city of Jerusalem and all the western land leading to it from Israel.

Again in 1967 all Israel’s Arab neighbors launched another attack – and once again they made things worse.

In only six days the Israeli Army – armed with U.S. technology and training – defeated the Russian backed Arabs and actually held all of Palestine and parts of Egypt, Jordon and Syria.

Under pressure from the UN – and specifically the U.S. – a ‘treaty’ returned most of the land of the Arab states (the Golan Heights were not returned to Syria due to their strategic military value).

Israel continued to occupy all the Palestinian territory as a “security measure”. The entire city of Palestine was also now annexed into Israel. Overall, Israel expanded its borders by about another 25%.

There you have it – an extremely short history lesson on what we today call the “Middle East Crisis”. Many details were left out – but you get the idea.

One thing is for sure – we cannot go back in history. We live in the present. We can only look forward and determine what we can do from here on out and what we can learn from the past. The egg once broken…

Going Forward

Very little of history is fair. Every nation that thrives was built through war, death, ethnic cleansing and unfair consequences. Today we consider ourselves too “civilized” to allow such practices, but we fool ourselves. The most powerful of nations are the ones who drove out the competition long ago.

The biggest issue facing Palestine is the imbalance of power between Israel & Palestine.

It’s David and Goliath.

Only this time it’s the Israelites that have the size and ego that needs tempering. They have become Goliath and with it they have forgotten some of their own struggles and have abandoned many of their own beliefs with regard to self determination and individual freedom.

Many Palestinians still cling to the hope that Israel can be eliminated – that they can ‘cleanse’ their country of the Jewish infestation. These are the same types of people that instigated the 1948 invasion and the 1967 attacks.

If Middle Eastern history is good for anything it is good as a bad example.

Hamas, Hezbollah and other ‘Jihadists” are a good example – of a bad example.

They cling to a 50 year old belief that intimidation, killing and hate will be enough – and as they do so they only make Palestine weaker as Israel gets stronger and more self righteous. Many proponents of this approach are only interested in the personal power they derive from these beliefs. It’s almost like a gang mentality.

Conclusion

The Palestinians may have gotten the short end of the stick in 1949. Once the “Land of Palestine” (first partitioned by the British Mandate of Palestine in 1920) included most of what is known as Jordon & Syria today. And yes, it included many Jewish towns and settlements.

Now this once proud people are relegated to the scraps Israel will allow them.

It may be said that much of the Palestinian plight was by their own hand, but I think the time has come to try and make amends with history and each nation allow the other – Israel and Palestine – to exist, thrive and be free.

In many ways, Israel will never be truly free until Palestine is. And Palestine cannot regain its proud heritage without Israel.

Time to fess up.

Simple.