PRK Tenang

Tunisia, Lebanon and Egypt: Western Hypocrisy Exposed

In the last couple of weeks, the world witness new governments being formed - in Lebanon and (impending) in Tunisia.  Now the Tunisian phenomenon seems to be spreading to nearby Egypt.  Is Tunisia the first card in the dominoes to fall?  This is indeed a unique moment - a defining one - for the Middle East which has for so long being governed by autocrats and backed by the West.

1.  Reactions from the West to the toppling of the Tunisian dictator, Ben Ali, have been ambivalent.  While They said they 'welcome democracy' they also warned against descent to turmoil.  

2.  In fact, it had been the West which was the source of all evils in the Middle East.  Ben Ali, and Habib Bourgiba before him, could not have survived for long without support from the West.

3.  Now it is the turn of Mubarak, another puppet  of the West, to face the music.  His survival is crucial to Western policies in the Middle East, and indeed to the fate of Israel.
4.  The reaction from the US to events in Egypt is that the Egyptian government should implement reforms in order to satisfy the protesters.
5.  What the protesters are demanding is that Mubarak step down.  A reformed Mubarak, if indeed possible, seems to fall short of this demand.
6.  Thirty years of Mubarak's iron-fist rule is too much for the Egyptians who deserve better government, but the US thinks differently:  Mubarak is still needed ... to fend off the Islamists.
7.  The latter objective has been the main reason the West supports authoritarian and corrupt regimes of the Middle East  - besides the interest of Israel and possibly oil.
8.  When Lebanon's new prime minister, a Sunni as required by the constitution, receives the blessings of Hezbollah, the US issued a veiled threat that justice must be upheld (in the murder of Rafik Hariri which the West would like ti implicate Hezbollah) and that Lebabon should be free from 'foreign interventions' (read Syrian and Iranian.)
9.  The bloody role of Israel in Lebanon as in the 1982 Sabra and Shatilla massacres and the 2008 destructive war are never mentioned.
10.  That Hezbollah is a reaction of the Lebanese people to Israeli aggression - and the only effective toll against it - is conveniently ignored by the West.

Siapakah yang memusuhi Raja?

Tenang

Tahun 2010 berlalu lebih awal!

Pagi Khamis 30 Disember 2010 negara dikejutkan dengan berita PM mengisytiharkan cuti umum untuk keesokan harinya, Jumaat 31 Disember.  Ada di kalangan rakyat yang gembira, tetapi ada juga terkedu.  Golongan kedua ini termasuk mereka yang merancang melaksanakan tugas-tugas rasmi sebelum tirai 2010 ditutup.  Najib, yang begitu teruja dengan kemenangan Malaysia ke atas negra jiran dalam sukan bola sepak, telah melondehkan tirai 2010 dengan mendadak sekali.

Ada yang tertanya: Bagaimana PM buat keputusan?  Sudahkah dia pertimbangkan baik-baik dari semua segi?  Dahlah hari bekerja - termasuk bank - 5 hari.  Menjelang hujung tahun yang patutnya dipanjangkan dengan sebab yang jelas tiba-tiba dipendekkan lagi ...

Sudahkah PM menimbangkan betul-betul implikasi ekonominya?

Ibu bapa yang menghantar anak mereka kembali ke sekolah pun terpaksa bergegas-gegas menyiapkan segala yang perlu - sebab sekolah tidak akan dibuka pada 31 Disember.

Ada 2 persoalan di sini.  Pertama: wajarkah cuti umum diisytiharkan sewenangnya?  Kedua: jikapun wajar diisytiharkan cuti tidakkah ada hari yang lebih sesuai?

Pada pendapat saya, jawapan soalan kedua itu jelas:  Hari yang lebih sesuai diisytiharkan ialah Isnin 3 Januari 2011.  Cuti umum Isnin bermakna kita panjangkan hayat 2010 supaya ramai yang sempat membereskan tugas yang nyaris-nyaris tertunggak sementara kita tunda sedikit permulaan 2011.

Ramai yang akan mampu tersenyum jika itu dilaksanakan.

Insiden ini menunjukkan gaya PM kita membuat keputusan:  trigger-happy.  Implikasinya serius apabila berhadapan dengan krisis yang memerlukan keputusan jitu dibuat dengan pantas.

Richard Holbrooke 1941-2010

'To End A War' in 1990's

In 2000's

My comment:  An outstanding, brilliant diplomat, probably accomplished more than Kissinger did for the US.  A very colourful person who conducted diplomacy in much of his own way - did not not shy away from befriending dictators.  He is widely quoted (in obituaries) for the following 1999 words:

"If you can prevent the deaths of people still alive, you're not doing a disservice to those already killed trying to do so.  And so I make no apologies for negotiating with Milosevic and even worse people, provided one doesn't lose one's point of view."

Kissinger said of Holbrooke:

"If Richard calls you and asks you for something, just say yes. If you say no, you'll eventually get to yes, but the journey will be very painful."

Colourful adjectives and pictures such as 'physical, feisty, bulldozer, the raging bull' have been used to describe Holbrooke the diplomat.

Notable for the Dayton Agreement which ended the Balkan war.  Of Jewish parentage, raised as a Quaker, but turned out to be atheist, according to his mother. Married three times.

Died on Monday December 13. 2010 caused by a torn aorta.  [A torn aorta is a rip in the inner wall of the body's largest artery. The result is serious internal bleeding, a loss of normal blood flow and possible complications in organs affected by the resulting lack of blood, according to medical experts. Without surgery it generally leads to rapid death.]

You may not agree with some of the things he did, but you have to admit he did work for his country's interest, and he had given his best, up to the last hours of his life.  Above all, he seemed to have truly believed in what he did.

Here is an obituary  that appears today on the New Yorker:

'Hisham says Soi Lek has upset Umno leaders'

I read the report by Clara Chooi of the Malaysian Insider [December 08, 2010 pm] with interest, not for the contents (as they are just predictable of the Keris-wielding Malay jaguh) but at the picture that goes with the report.  I searched through the web for reports by other - especially the mainstream - media but could not find any at the time (just suppose they are still waiting for words from the top on how to print it ...)

You can read for yourself the report in the Malaysian Insider, but I just want you to behold the picture that goes with the report:

Isn't it the IGP in the background.?

If so, it brings home the very point [of course, there was another] which Chua Soi Lek seemed trying to get across:  abuse of power, conflict of interest, complacency, sheer recklessness ...

In his capacity as a politician, representing (the big brother or the real tuan)  UMNO at that, airing his disappointment over some opinions from his own political comrades, he has the IGP on his side.

The picture disturbs me, an ordinary citizen, just as many statements that came out of the mouth of this politician do.  He threatens his political enemies - and friends alike - while playing with the ambiguity as to whether he is just a benign politician or the sinister in charge of the police.

Are we on the verge of seeing the ISA being invoked, given the charged atmosphere:  what with the 'Ketuanan Melayu' issue being spinned out-of-control, and the Palace seemed so gullibly dragged in?  Furthermore. the GE fever, or fervour, which Najib has brought on, seems to have been doused by a stream of bad omens against it.

The GE is just a mechanism to perpetuate the BN's hold on power.  There is other means too.

The ISA cards could be on the table, and the pretexts have been so nicely designed ...  After all, Najib has also vowed that Putrajaya should be defended at all costs.