SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home American Allies Drop Out Drip by Drip

THE SPINE DECEMBER 7, 2010

American Allies Drop Out Drip by Drip

BY MARTIN PERETZ

I couldn't believe my eyes as I read Alan Cowell's New York Times report this morning that (as of now) 19 countries would not attend the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo for the imprisoned Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo. Last year's honoree was Barack Obama, for whom there was a full-court attendance but whom I credit for the shameful deference to Beijing of so-called American allies.

So, yes, I understand, why--in addition to China itself--Russia, Cuba Venezuela, Iran, Venezuela and a handful of other certified dictatorships followed the none-too-subtle demands of Beijing diplomacy to stay away. The reason for Sudan's behavior is also self- evident. Its capacity to murder the non-Arab Muslims of Darfur and the Christians and animists of Sudan's south is directly dependent on the indulgence of its largest oil investor in far-away Asia.

But why would countries allied with the United States and (some) also dependent on Washington follow the desperate Chinese line? Saudi Arabia, for example, to whom our current president genuflected (not the first of our presidents to do so) and in whose interests much of our Middle East policy has been run for decades and decades? Egypt, the second largest beneficiary of American aid? Colombia, an enemy of Venezuela, which is an enemy of America? Tunisia and Morocco, the mildest pro-Western and Arab despotisms? And, then, of course, Iraq and Afghanistan and Pakistan for the survival of which American blood is shed every day? Yes, every day.

That Obama does not know how to partner an alliance is already widely known. He has contempt for many of our historic associates and associations: it is almost a surprise that Great Britain and France, Canada and Australia are also not sitting out the Oslo ceremony. And he is not the sort to worry if they would.

There will probably by many more surprises in the drop-out list. After all, no country is obliged to announce its non-participation. Just don't show up and you get credit in China. Who's to guarantee that Kuwait and the emirates will be in Oslo when a true international hero is honored?

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 89 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

89 comments

I realize that for Marty everything is Barack Obama's fault -- but in all seriousness, how can he lay the pussilanimity of certain pro-US regimes to the Chinese at the feet of the Obama Administration?? Does he think that those regimes would decide it was worth antagonizing China if only this Administration was somehow friendlier to them (or, in the Saudis' case, unfriendlier)? Is there even a shred of logic -- even fantasy logic -- at work here?

- wildboy

December 7, 2010 at 1:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, I'm also puzzled as to how the U.S. is responsible for the attendance of other countries at an award ceremony in Norway for a Chinese recipient.

- ironyroad

December 7, 2010 at 1:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

No, wildboy, there is not. But to be fair, Marty does not even pretend anymore to occupy a world governed by empirical fact or rational thought. Marty lists a bunch of countries in which anyone who behaves like this year's laureate would be regarded as a threat to the regime and imprisoned or worse, and he cannot conceive of a better reason for why these countries might choose not to honor a pro-democracy subversive with their presence than "because Barack Obama is a wimp"? How about, "Because dictators do not regard people who seek to overthrow dictatorships by democratic reform as heroes to be honored"? Besides which, precisely what American national interest would be served by persuading any of the countries to attend this particular party? To prove that we are able to persuade unwilling partners to do things that don't actually serve any material American interest for them to do? To what end?

- rhubarbs

December 7, 2010 at 1:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The boycott by some of these countries, like Egypt and even Saudi Arabia, shows the power China is projecting around the globe. Personally, I am not impressed by the Scandinavian Peace Prize. Sweden is a country in which Fascists made stunning gains. “Sweden faced political turmoil last night following shock general election gains by the country's main far-right party which appeared to have denied the governing centre-right coalition an overall majority.” http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/farright-gains-throw-swedish-government-into-turmoil-2084757.html In Norway the “far right Progress party has propped up a rightwing coalition government since elections last October, in which the Labour government that had dominated Norwegian politics for almost a century was ousted.” http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,,711990,00.html It’s as if Quisling were offering a “peace prize.”

- jdyer

December 7, 2010 at 1:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/07/china-nobel-peace-prize-clowns "...It will be the first time the prize has not been handed over since Nazi Germany barred the pacifist Carl von Ossietzky from attending in 1936." I wonder why, in 2008, "10 countries did not attend the ceremony for Martti Ahtisaari, the former Finnish prime minister." Guardian notes only 65 countries were actually invited to attend. Seems like more of a blow to the Nobel Committee than to President Obama. Peretz really needs to get a grip on his outrage. Logically, the 2010 NPP should have been awarded to Mahmoud Abbas as his "incentive" to get back to direct talks :)

- K2K

December 7, 2010 at 2:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

As usual, rhubarbs makes the salient points with brevity and eloquence.

- roidubouloi

December 7, 2010 at 3:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's not entirely a Swedish Peace Prize -- Scandinavia also includes Norway, a country occupied by the Nazis and which mounted quite a respectable resistance movement.

- ironyroad

December 7, 2010 at 3:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I also agree with jackson about China's power projection, but there is something else about this particular award that seems to generate more controversy than enthusiasm. Hello malahat. Thank you for the prayer in the Turkey thread. I am, hopefully yet also unwillingly, bailing out of New York, at the cost of also going into a risky exile from my longtime doctors. Long story. Really lovely prayer, now bookmarked.

- K2K

December 7, 2010 at 3:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Scandinavia also includes Norway, a country occupied by the Nazis and which mounted quite a respectable resistance movement." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bernardhenri-levy/post_1373_b_791632.html "And the last sign concerns, exactly, Norway, and beyond Norway, this Scandanavia I love but have had difficulty recognizing these last few years. Isn't it regrettable to learn, for example, that the country of the Oslo accords was the first, after Toronto, to greet the film as a triumph? Apart from the film, of which one might suspect the author's nationality influenced its favorable reception, isn't it distressing to think that a book like Susan Abulhawa's Mornings in Jenin, a concentration of anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish clichés masquerading as fiction, is a best seller there, praised by most of the major media? Worse still, isn't it disquieting to learn that, in the same city where Itzak Rabin and Yasser Arafat were that close to making peace, the Israeli embassy has been forced to move because it is harassed and threatened, thus posing a "threat" to the peace and tranquillity of the residents of the upscale Parkveien neighborhood by its very presence and by the security barriers (referred to in Oslo as the 'Wailing Wall") it was obliged to set up to protect itself from the bully boys? And what a pity, finally, to see what has happened in Sweden, next door, where twenty fascist-leaning deputies are currently sitting in the national parliament, and where a growing fringe of the left interprets the ideals of tolerance as an authorization to voice their reprobation for the very existence of a State of Jewish majority in the Middle East. And what a pity that the city of Malmö, the country's third largest, is run by a mayor whose claim to fame is that of having declared war--so he trumpets--on both antisemitism and on Zionism. Adventures in progressive dialectic. Grimaces from what was once the very face of social democracy in Europe. It is frightening." http://www.israelwhat.com/2010/12/05/oslomorning-in-jenin-explains-the-conflict-in-palestine-better-than-any-other-book/ "Norway has an unhealthy appetite for books about Israeli evil. This hunger, we are told, does not spring from anti-Semitism, but is rooted in humanitarian concerns."

- noga1

December 7, 2010 at 3:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jackson, here's a look at what happened recently in Malmo, Sweden when the Israelis came to town for a tennis match: http://vodpod.com/watch/1428923-sweden-in-grip-of-islam I'm suspicious when those who are worried about the pernicious influence of radical Muslim immigrants are always described as "fascists". Turning it around, what's an appropriate word to describe those who aren't concerned?

- willjames77

December 7, 2010 at 4:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ironyroad "It's not entirely a Swedish Peace Prize -- Scandinavia also includes Norway, a country occupied by the Nazis and which mounted quite a respectable resistance movement." It also had a "respectable" (in the of numbers of supporters) nazi movement that included the great writer and nobel prize winner Knut Hamsun.

- jdyer

December 7, 2010 at 4:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, Malmo has become famous for anti-Jewish activity. "And the last sign concerns, exactly, Norway, and beyond Norway, this Scandanavia I love but have had difficulty recognizing these last few years. Isn't it regrettable to learn, for example, that the country of the Oslo accords was the first, after Toronto, to greet the film as a triumph?... Apart from the film, of which one might suspect the author's nationality influenced its favorable reception, isn't it distressing to think that a book like Susan Abulhawa's Mornings in Jenin, a concentration of anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish clichés masquerading as fiction, is a best seller there, praised by most of the major media? Worse still, isn't it disquieting to learn that, in the same city where Itzak Rabin and Yasser Arafat were that close to making peace, the Israeli embassy has been forced to move because it is harassed and threatened, thus posing a "threat" to the peace and tranquillity of the residents of the upscale Parkveien neighborhood by its very presence and by the security barriers (referred to in Oslo as the 'Wailing Wall") it was obliged to set up to protect itself from the bully boys? And what a pity, finally, to see what has happened in Sweden, next door, where twenty fascist-leaning deputies are currently sitting in the national parliament, and where a growing fringe of the left interprets the ideals of tolerance as an authorization to voice their reprobation for the very existence of a State of Jewish majority in the Middle East. And what a pity that the city of Malmö, the country's third largest, is run by a mayor whose claim to fame is that of having declared war--so he trumpets--on both antisemitism and on Zionism. Adventures in progressive dialectic. Grimaces from what was once the very face of social democracy in Europe. It is frightening." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bernardhenri-levy/post_1373_b_791632.html

- jdyer

December 7, 2010 at 4:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

willjames makes a pertinent point. I have thought about it a great deal. The thing is, when I listen to what some of these who are "worried about the pernicious influence of radical Muslim immigrants" have to say about Jews I am not convinced that the good of Jews is exactly their primary concern. Many of them just use Jewish plight to ply their trade and express anger at Jews who remain disdainful of their movement. Some of them use the cause of fighting antisemitism as a trump card the way rabid leftists use it to blame Jews who support Israel as abusing this term. It's a terribly unpleasant time to be Jewish these days and to support Israel. There is no political agenda in which Jews can fit in without compromising themselves in some way.

- noga1

December 7, 2010 at 4:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"That Obama does not know how to partner an alliance is already widely- known. He has contempt for many of our historic associates and associations: it is almost a surprise that Great Britain and France, Canada and Australia are also not sitting out the Oslo ceremony." On the positive side - and there is one - posts such as this highlight the outlines of the alternative universe Marty occupies. For the record, if Obama ran in Canada, he would have about 60% of the vote across the country - a little less in Alberta and a little more in Quebec - there is no evidence that a single Canadian senior policy-maker, politician or diplomat feels the slightest bit of neglect on the part of the incompetent, narcissist negro prez of the Confederate States. No administration official has referred to "Old Europe" and publicly denigrated vast stretches of Europe - which is not something one might say about Peretz and some of his friends on this board. If Australia had stayed out, it would have been because there is a country of 1.4 billion people sitting right on top of it, and not because the negro prez failed to shine the Big Aussie Boot. And the UK does not have a foreign policy at this moment and is bankrupt, so what it does externally - "to attend or not to attend, that is the question" - is a mystery wrapped in cheap paper inside a soggy box. Was reading the latest issue of Scientific American on the flight this morning - about "weak gauge bosons" ... describes Marty to a P.

- icarusr

December 7, 2010 at 5:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

" No administration official has referred to "Old Europe" and publicly denigrated vast stretches of Europe - which is not something one might say about Peretz and some of his friends on this board. " I wasn't aware that Peretz was an "administration official".

- noga1

December 7, 2010 at 5:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

icarusr “For the record, if Obama ran in Canada, he would have about 60% of the vote across the country - a little less in Alberta and a little more in Quebec….” What record is that, Icarus’ dream log? Could a Canadian black man become Premier of any Canadian province, much less become PM of the country?

- jdyer

December 7, 2010 at 5:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Icarus protests too much. Like some obsessed posters here he has a very low opinion of Peretz yet he spends an inordinate amount of time jeering him. Would any sane man spend all his time attacking someone who lives in “alternate universe?”

- jdyer

December 7, 2010 at 5:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Professor Allan Hutchinson on Whether a Black Man Could Become our PM" http://osgoode.yorku.ca/media2.nsf/releases/39A5F3BD8C7E5B0F852573CC00618410

- jdyer

December 7, 2010 at 6:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

As usual Icarus is talking through his hat.

- jdyer

December 7, 2010 at 6:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, I'm not sure there is no political agenda in which Jews can find their place. Canada seems to have a PM who is not ashamed to boycott the Durban farce and to cut off government aid to NGOs that have a rabidly anti-Israel agenda. He is hardly a fascist, although there are fascists who share some of his opinions. In the States this week, after a blitz of protest, the Progressive Democratic Alliance decided not to support a BDS initiative against Israel. In Italy, given the disabling polarization between left and right, Fini, Casini and Rutelli are actually trying to create a centrist party. And this newly constellated center has a decent chance of pulling people of good will from both poles toward the middle. This is a round-about way of suggesting, as I'm sure you agree, that the way forward requires rejecting both a naive multiculturalism as well as a xenophobic nativism. And, yes, we will continue to find ourselves with strange bedfellows until there comes a time when supporters of gay rights and green energy and opponents of Islamization find a way to constellate a shared middle realm where they can party together. Whether or not such a thing can happen before the Messiah comes remains to be seen...

- willjames77

December 7, 2010 at 7:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's true that Norway had the Knut Hamsuns and the Vidkun Quislings, but we had the Ezra Pounds and we don't know who the Quislings would have been as the United States wasn't put to the test by invasion and occupation.

- ironyroad

December 7, 2010 at 7:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Noga, I'm not sure there is no political agenda in which Jews can find their place. Canada seems to have a PM who is not ashamed to boycott the Durban farce and to cut off government aid to NGOs that have a rabidly anti-Israel agenda. He is hardly a fascist, although there are fascists who share some of his opinions." Of course I didn't mean Harper, but as we are being reminded repeatedly by his opponents, he leads a minority government and is being vilified in the most rabid way. Here is an example I found on some message board which is representative, after Canada was denied a seat on the UNSC: " The Harper minority Conservative government immediately blamed Michael Ignatieff, Leader of the Opposition, because of some remark he made, as if any of the voting countries would have even known, and their supporters blamed a horde of other people. I, of course, absolutely believe it was their own fault. They've embarrassed us every time they've appeared on the world stage. I've gotten so I dread hearing they're attending another international meeting. But the reason I'm grateful to President Obama and the USA is because there are rumours that they shot down the attempt by the Harper government to get a seat. If so, good for them. It's not that I wouldn't want Canada to have a seat. I just don't want that loathesome crowd representing us. I'd rather wait until the next opportunity, when we have a decent government." Here is it is again: "I just don't want that loathesome crowd representing us." The " loathesome [sic] crowd" being a government that alienated countries with the most gruesome violations of human rights by sticking up for what is right.

- noga1

December 7, 2010 at 7:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ironyroad "It's true that Norway had the Knut Hamsuns and the Vidkun Quislings, but we had the Ezra Pounds and we don't know who the Quislings would have been as the United States wasn't put to the test by invasion and occupation." Yes, there may have been Quislings everywhere, but does that justify Norwegian and Swedish politicians and intellectuals embrace of an antisemitic stance vis-à-vis Israel?

- jdyer

December 7, 2010 at 7:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think maybe ironyroad finds Norway's anti-Israel positions excusable. Or nothing to worry too much about. I notice they don't even figure in his general calculus about the respect owing to Norway. http://www.israelwhat.com/2010/11/15/a-book-to-change-your-way-of-thinking/ http://www.israelwhat.com/2010/11/02/art-and-propaganda-what-if-there-were-an-israeli-hakon-gullvag/comment-page-1/#comment-30750

- noga1

December 7, 2010 at 8:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

here is a corrected link: http://www.israelwhat.com/2010/11/02/art-and-propaganda-what-if-there-were-an-israeli-hakon-gullvag/

- noga1

December 7, 2010 at 8:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://alethonews.wordpress.com/2010/06/13/norwegian-port-union-boycotts-israeli-ships/

- noga1

December 7, 2010 at 8:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://homelandsecuritynewswire.com/norway-bans-testing-israel-bound-submarines

- noga1

December 7, 2010 at 8:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here's my proposal to demonstrate a little American Power and make a point in Oslo that the Chinese will understand. The President should plan a little show of force. Imagine if President Obama attends with Former President Jimmy Carter and Former Vice President Gore. They invite Lech Walesa and Desmond Tutu to join them in their delegation. This show of previous Nobel Winners would get an awful lot of Press. It would honor the award and they could celebrate China's first Nobel Peace Prize winner, as a jab to the Chinese position in Tibet. Wishing the rising nation that they win many more awards. Yes it will be consored in China, but via Youtube and other Internet communications it could become a touch point for those in China that are aware of the June 4th Movement.

- CRS9TNR

December 7, 2010 at 8:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

CRS--it's an interesting and appealing idea. However, I read somewhere recently that the young in China are very nationalistic, and I believe that a large population of PRC approve of China's doings in Tibet. So I'm not sure how your plan would help. I guess we'd be showing the world that we're unafraid of irritating China. But I'm not sure we are unafraid.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 7, 2010 at 9:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The President should plan a little show of force. Imagine if President Obama attends with Former President Jimmy Carter and Former Vice President Gore. They invite Lech Walesa and Desmond Tutu to join them in their delegation." Oh, Jimmy, will surely scare the Chinese. And Tutu will make them tremble.

- jdyer

December 7, 2010 at 9:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Malahat: as you well know, even in Alberta, "conservative" means a wholly different thing than in the United States. Bear in mind that the biggest scandal in Alberta right now is the failure of Alberta Health Services - a government body - to reduce wait times in emergency rooms - an essentially Canadian issues that knows no provincial boundaries. As well, the founding father of Alberta conservatism was a Social Credit politician who advocated effectively what the Fed is doing in the US .... The level of support for the current gang who runs the province or a new batch of right wingers who might come in says nothing whatever about the personal popularity of Obama, as a political figure. He is generally admired and well-liked across Canada, even in Alberta. The bigger point is that Obama is most assuredly not seen as liability for the United States in terms of maintaining and nurturing the alliances of the United States ....

- icarusr

December 7, 2010 at 10:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga: "" No administration official has referred to "Old Europe" and publicly denigrated vast stretches of Europe - which is not something one might say about Peretz and some of his friends on this board. " I wasn't aware that Peretz was an "administration official"." I assume that your comment was not meant as a snark, but rather was meant in a constructive way to help me be more literal, and less contextual, in writing here. As you implicitly point out, there are those who are unable to read a simple English sentence in context and understand the full measure of the meaning. The sentence should properly have read: "No administration official has referred to "Old Europe" and publicly denigrated vast stretches of Europe - which is not something one can say about the old administration or its admirers such as Peretz, or indeed some of his friends on this board." Thanks for spotting the lack of literal clarity.

- icarusr

December 7, 2010 at 10:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

icarusr "Malahat: as you well know, even in Alberta, "conservative" means a wholly different thing than in the United States." And this of course proves that Obama would be elected PM of Canada. Icarus is dreaming again. "The level of support for the current gang who runs the province or a new batch of right wingers who might come in says nothing whatever about the personal popularity of Obama, as a political figure." Well, they don't have to vote for him, do they?

- jdyer

December 7, 2010 at 10:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I love it when Icarus and his ilk try to defend an indefensible position using faux logic and worse analogies.

- jdyer

December 7, 2010 at 10:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ironyroad was speaking originally about Norway in WW2, and pointing out that "Scandinavia" means more than Sweden. ironyroad (now apparently trapped in a third-person form of narrative) does not dispute facts advanced concerning Norway today but reserves the right to argue about interpretation and weighting of said facts. He does not claim unerring judgment in these matters. However, none of the facts mentioned to ironyroad would, so far at least, seem to have anything to do with the awarding of the Nobel Prize to a Chinese dissident.

- ironyroad

December 7, 2010 at 11:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ironyroad, third person, needs to discuss these issues with Ironyroad first person and then decide who is speaking. The well integrated first and third person JDyer does not know to whom he should respond, to Ironyroad third person or to Ironyroad first person.

- jdyer

December 7, 2010 at 11:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Like some obsessed posters here he has a very low opinion of Peretz yet he spends an inordinate amount of time jeering him." JD ... Three posts in response to one of mine, which was in fact in response to another poster ... "obsessed" and "inordinate", indeed. Coal mine calling an espresso-maker black :). You had the cataract on your eye removed; what about the one on your pathetic, sad, angry, lost soul? As I said before, read the Bible and follow it. Go forth and multiply, all by yourself.

- icarusr

December 7, 2010 at 11:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Icarus' reply doesn't change anything. His comments on these threads are obsessive, they are also repetitious: He has posted a variation on this comment on almost every Peretz thread. 12/07/2010 - 5:30pm EDT | icarusr "On the positive side - and there is one - posts such as this highlight the outlines of the alternative (sic) universe Marty occupies." I wonder what alternate universe Icarus lives in? In a universe in which “alternate” and “alternative” mean the same thing.

- jdyer

December 8, 2010 at 12:29am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"12/07/2010 - 11:09pm EDT | ironyroad ironyroad was speaking originally about Norway in WW2, " And doing so by way of commenting on Marty's less than enthusiastic endorsement of Oslo's virtue. My comment was in response to that, ironyroad, as he must well know. So Norway has a respectable resistance to the Nazis. How does that endow it with respectability today, or mitigates from its antisemitic hatred for Israel? Doesn't the present record sully considerably whatever moral achievement Norwegians claim as their due during WWII? What's the point of standing up to fascists when a few decades later they conspire with fascists to slander and persecute the only Jewish state in the world? Sometimes, ironyroad, you, first person, appear not to be too certain where exactly you stand on these issues.

- noga1

December 8, 2010 at 7:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Thanks for spotting the lack of literal clarity." Are you feeling better now that you vented your displeasure at me because I pointed out to the logical inconsistency in your argument? And do you really think that jeering at me relieves the clumsiness of your of overly verbose expostulations here?

- noga1

December 8, 2010 at 7:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

He he ... "the clumsiness of your of overly verbose expostulations here" ... Noga dear - see how many posts you have on these threads, and compare them to mine. Then we discuss "overly verbose expostulations". But of course, my posts end up being "overly verbose" in part because every verbal short-cut and implication is jumped up, attacked and dissected as a "logical inconsistency", to be followed by a torrent of abuse. So one ends up having to qualify and explain and support and cite and ... ending up in the "overly verbose" column. And please note that it was you who launched the snark - which I found unwarranted and, frankly, pointlessly literal, as the sense of my sentence was quite clear - and when I replied, as politely as I could, it was you who again went on the attack. "jeering", "clumsiness", "overly verbose" ... whatever. You're right, Peretz is not a member of the any administration, and neither are you. It would, indeed, be a "logical inconsistency" to suggest otherwise, if that is what I did. And if that is what I did, then bully for you to have identified it, called me on it and demolished my post.

- icarusr

December 8, 2010 at 11:00am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Malahat: Obama's popularity is about 5-8% higher in Quebec than the national average; and I suspect it would be lower in Alberta by the same margin. Whether this is "slightly" or "more than slightly" is not a point I wish to argue. Remove the word entirely - Obama is more popular in Canada than any Canadian politician, more in Quebec and less in Alberta. That Obama's popularity in Canada would be higher than his 53% tally in the 2008 election would not be surprising to me, frankly: the Liberals, the NDP, the Greens and the BQ, all left-of-centre parties, poll around 60-70% regularly (the Conservatives stand at 34% in the latest polls), and even the Conservatives still include a large chunk of red Tories (mostly in Ontario and the Maritimes) who would be uncomfortable with Republicans and very much at home with mainstream Democrat such as HRC and Obama. And, of course, the main point I was trying to make in response to Peretz is that there is no evidence - none whatever - that Obama's foreign policy has turned Canada and Canadians away from the United States and from supporting him. He is still more popular in Canada than any Canadian politician, and more than he is in the US itself.

- icarusr

December 8, 2010 at 11:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

That's true, I'm not sure where I stand. I don't claim to be endowed with unerring judgment, as I said. I don't know whether objections to Israeli policy or even grotesque caricatures can be seen as part and parcel of an across-the-board Scandinavian antisemitism. To say yes, would be to suggest that one can't, for example, question (I don't even say oppose) the blockade of Gaza without somehow lining up with Hamas. That seems very simplistic, and also dangerous, as supporters of Israel who oppose specific actions or policies are lumped in with fundamentalist opponents of Israel's existence, making those supporters feel that the only support desired is uncritical support. In this case, what seemed to be a blanket condemnation of "Scandinavia" (JD's post, not Marty's) struck me as a little unfair. The Peace Prize has gone to laureates as wide-ranging as Theodore Roosevelt, Carl von Ossietzky, Ralph Bunche, Willy Brandt, Elie Wiesel, and the UNHCR, as well as pairs such as Arafat/Peres and Kissinger/Le Duc Tho. I don't claim the Norwegian historical record justifies current attitudes. But I don't think the historical record should be treated as if it didn't exist either.

- ironyroad

December 8, 2010 at 11:19am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The NPP is separate from all the other NP, which are awarded in Stockholm. The NPP is strictly a Norwegian enterprise. http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/nomination_committee/members/ all five members of the NPP committee are Norwegians, and their advisory board is also [mostly] Norwegian, so I think it best to drop jackson's "Scandinavia" label. I recall we had this same rehash about the various Scandinavian countries (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Iceland) months ago. "Nominations for the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize: Director Geir Lundestad of the Norwegian Nobel Institute has announced that there are 237 nominees for the Nobel Peace Prize 2010, out of which 38 are organizations. This is the highest number of nominees for the Nobel Peace Prize ever. From the statutes of the Nobel Foundation: Proposals received for the award of a prize, and investigations and opinions concerning the award of a prize, may not be divulged. A prize-awarding body may, however, after due consideration in each individual case, permit access to material which formed the basis for the evaluation and decision concerning a prize, for purposes of research in intellectual history. Such permission may not, however, be granted until at least 50 years have elapsed after the date on which the decision in question was made." http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/nomination_committee/nominations-2010/ "...In the light of this first review, the Committee draws up the so-called short list - i.e. the list of candidates selected for more thorough consideration. The short list typically contains from five to twenty candidates. The candidates on the short list are then considered by the Nobel Institute's permanent advisers. In addition to the Institute's Director and Research Director, the body of advisers generally consists of a small group of Norwegian university professors with broad expertise in subject areas with a bearing on the Peace Prize. The advisers usually have a couple of months in which to draw up their reports. Reports are also occasionally requested from other Norwegian and foreign experts. ..." So, we have to wait fifty years to even learn the identities of the other 236 nominations, or the short list, for 2010.

- K2K

December 8, 2010 at 11:48am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

malahat "Icarus, Re: Obama's popularity as a hypothetical leader in Canada - and the 5-8% higher in Quebec, or the 60% on average statistics, do you have a link to any recent polling data?" Icarus' hypothesis is ridiculous. Famous people always score high in popularity polls. That doesn't often translate into votes should the popular person decide to run for office. This doubly true of famous foreign persons; Canadians know that Obama will never run for office there. Make believe polls may be fun but don’t real political meaning.

- jdyer

December 8, 2010 at 12:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

K2K “The NPP is separate from all the other NP, which are awarded in Stockholm. The NPP is strictly a Norwegian enterprise.” Come on, K, the “peace” prize is part of the Nobel prizes. (The prizes are bi-national) Moreover, while Norway and (Sweden) are not the only Scandinavian countries, they are Scandinavians hence one can call these prizes Scandinavian prizes. Ironyroad likes to get literal. It gives him an opportunity to exercise his irony.

- jdyer

December 8, 2010 at 12:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

K2K “The NPP is separate from all the other NP, which are awarded in Stockholm. The NPP is strictly a Norwegian enterprise.” Come on, K, the “peace” prize is part of the Nobel prizes. (The prizes are bi-national) Moreover, while Norway and (Sweden) are not the only Scandinavian countries, they are Scandinavians hence one can call these prizes Scandinavian prizes. Ironyroad likes to get literal. It gives him an opportunity to exercise his irony.

- jdyer

December 8, 2010 at 12:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

K2K “The NPP is separate from all the other NP, which are awarded in Stockholm. The NPP is strictly a Norwegian enterprise.” Come on, K, the “peace” prize is part of the Nobel prizes. (The prizes are bi-national) Moreover, while Norway and (Sweden) are not the only Scandinavian countries, they are Scandinavians hence one can call these prizes Scandinavian prizes. Ironyroad likes to get literal. It gives him an opportunity to exercise his irony.

- jdyer

December 8, 2010 at 12:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There is not a single poll, and the target of the various polls is not "Obama for Canadian PM" - although there is a website on that as well (though I am not getting my numbers from that). In these situations, you take a series of different polls, and you distill the information in them to arrive at a broad considered view about public opinion trends on a given issue. For example, in the Pew Global Attitudes Project, you get a threefold increase in "confidence in the US president" numbers, from 28% to 88%, from 2007 to 2009. You also get a sizeable increase in favourable attitudes towards the United States in that period (13 pp). http://pewglobal.org/database/?indicator=6&country=39 That tells you something about Canadian attitudes to the new occupant of the White House. In September 2009, different polls indicated that 52% of Canadians thought Obama was good for the United States - not the same thing as "Obama for Canadian PM", I realise, but still, an interesting figure - and the figure was 62% in Quebec. (This was in the context of closer ties between Canada and the US.) Regardless of the numbers, that tells me something about the divergence of attitudes in Quebec and the rest of the country (taking the margin of error into account, the 10% difference, I would suggest, could be in reality in the 5-8% range). Then there are newsreports that note his higher numbers in Canada than in the US (and given that he hovers in the mid-50s, this would suggest something in the order of 60s in Canada). For example, this one, which is a bit dated, but is nevertheless useful to illustrate the point: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/20/world/fg-obama-canada20 And so on. You can quibble my point to death, of course, or dismiss its relevance - fairly routine tactic on the Spine for anything the usual harassers don't like - the point remains that Peretz's attack on Obama for having cost the US allies is just sheer Goddamned nonsense.

- icarusr

December 8, 2010 at 1:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, so much for my links ...

- icarusr

December 8, 2010 at 1:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Malahat, Jackson, I don't think the original point was whether or not Obama could win in Canada, but rather that Canadians like him; contrary to what Marty suggests, his foreign policy has not turned off our friends from the north. I haven't bothered to look up his numbers in the EU, but I wonder whether those polls would also contradict Marty.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 8, 2010 at 1:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Thanks Malahat for posting the quote above.

- jdyer

December 8, 2010 at 2:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Icarus, "...For the record, if Obama ran in Canada, he would have about 60% of the vote across the country - a little less in Alberta and a little more in Quebec..." “That Obama does not know how to partner an alliance is already widely- known. He has contempt for many of our historic associates and associations: it is almost a surprise that Great Britain and France, Canada and Australia are also not sitting out the Oslo ceremony. And he is not the sort to worry if they would.” Was Marty is not writing about popularity contests. He is writing about American loss of the ability to influence friendly governments’ decisions. He is probably wrong about how much power we have lost in the world but it makes no sense criticizing him for views he does not hold. Too often people are so ready to criticize Marty that they tend to misread his posts.

- jdyer

December 8, 2010 at 2:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Indeed, JD, your reposting of that para contains one of those Marty Moments, which can be sketched abstractly as follows. "X is not happening. But if X did happen, it would be Obama's fault/Obama wouldn't be interested/Obama wouldn't notice etc." What Marty never seems to consider is that the units "Obama" and "X is not happening" may be connected -- for example, "Obama" and "Russia working against us over Iran." In this case, of course, the whole thing is silly, as Obama would hardly have to convince Canada, France, Australia etc to show up for the Nobel award ceremony.

- ironyroad

December 8, 2010 at 3:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Malahat: "You distill one way, I another." "Lies, damned lies, and Statistics" ... :P ... on reading polls and challenges of interpretation, you will not get too much of an argument from me.

- icarusr

December 8, 2010 at 4:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Was Marty is not writing about popularity contests. He is writing about American loss of the ability to influence friendly governments’ decisions." You're right about what Marty thinks he is writing about, and if that had been your initial criticism of my comment, we would have had a proper discussion. Please see below. 1. "Contempt" is a strong word. It is highly likely that where a Prez has "contempt" for a democratic ally, the people of that ally will not be indifferent to the expression of that contempt. Accordingly, a foreign politician's favourable ratings in a country is, in my view, at least one sound way of measuring whether that politician is seen to be contemptuous of the country, its government and its people. (There are others.) There is no evidence that the people of Canada have sensed any sort of "contempt" on the part of Obama vis à vis the Government of Canada or its policies, or indeed Canada itself. It is possible that Obama has contempt that does not show, but that is not what Peretz is saying. It is possible that Canadians - who, in the available data (from 2009 - Pew Global Research) had an 88% approval rating for Obama - are masochists who will return Obama's "contempt" with expressions of approval, but again, it is highly unlikely. One can, you know, refute an argument in any number of ways - sometimes directly, sometimes obliquely. Mine was a response by a proxy point because I could use publicly verifiable information for it. What Government's think - the insider stuff - is not, for the most part, verifiable (short of a wikileak), and it is less verifiable and more prone to analysis and inference. 2. Of course, it is possible to see "contempt" in actions and not just in demeanour or in words. But then, what of the actions? Obama's visit to Ottawa in February 2009 was a love-in; nothing he has done in the last two years has in any way been contemptuous of the alliance or the friendship. Objectively speaking, this is a far more "Canada-friendly" administration than that whose intellectual giants such as Bolton never ceased to insult allies. I need not go into the vilification suffered by Chretien at the hands of the American right, including elements of the Bush Administration, for failing to join the Iraq adventure; now, that was contempt. Not only has nothing like that happened in the last two year, it is unthinkable that it would. 3. There are elements in the Canadian Government that do not like Obama; this has nothing to do with any perceived or real "contempt" on the part of Obama for the traditional allies of the United States. And the Government, Conservative though it is and in some ways aligned with the Republicans, recognises Obama's popularity in Canada and respects it - even if privately they grumble. And they do. Peretz is talking through his hat. Bush's "popularity" collapsed in Canada for any number of reasons after his election (from about 55% to about 28%), some of which relate to

- icarusr

December 8, 2010 at 4:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Irony et al, I have no problem with your posts, now. Agree or disagree, at least you are addressing something Marty actually said.

- jdyer

December 8, 2010 at 5:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"He he ... "the clumsiness of your of overly verbose expostulations here" ... "Noga dear - see how many posts you have on these threads, and compare them to mine.'" Yes, but I'd like to believe that my many posts are not verbose. Disraeli got it right in his accurate description of his political rival William Gladstone, that could easily apply to a few posters around here: "A sophistical rhetorician, inebriated with the exuberance of his own verbosity, and gifted with an egotistical imagination that can at all times command an interminable and inconsistent series of arguments to malign an opponent and to glorify himself." Definition of VERBOSE 1: containing more words than necessary : wordy ; also : impaired by wordiness 2: given to wordiness — ver·bose·ly adverb — ver·bose·ness noun — ver·bos·i·ty\-ˈbä-sə-tē\ noun See verbose defined for English-language learners » Examples of VERBOSE 1. He is a verbose speaker. 2. She has a verbose writing style. 3. Something seems to have gone seriously wrong with the subediting and proof-reading of this self-indulgently verbose and misprint-ridden production, which is further flawed by a mis-match between the author's vaulting theoretical ambitions and his scholarly limitations, notably his faulty grasp of ancient Greek and inability to deliver a clear and consistent line of reasoned and logical argument. —Paul Cartledge, Times Literary Supplement, 8 Mar. 1991 I'll take a wild guess, icarus: you probably think your style is elegant and spare, understatedly sarcastic and pithy.

- noga1

December 8, 2010 at 6:04pm

I thought Cartledge was being very unfair to me in that review. He never took into account that I didn't know ancient Greek at all (still don't!) and that the typographical software at the time (late 80s) had been purchased at the flea market on Saturday mornings in front of Brixton tube station.

- ironyroad

December 8, 2010 at 6:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I found it striking that in both the quotes that I helpfully provided above, a certain trait of character is suggested as orbiting the verbose subject. "between the author's vaulting theoretical ambitions and his scholarly limitations" "gifted with an egotistical imagination that can at all times command an interminable and inconsistent series of arguments to malign an opponent and to glorify himself."

- noga1

December 8, 2010 at 7:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Speaking of allies, false and true, here is a clarifying article: show all Thursday, December 9, 2010 | 03:55 Beirut Subscribe to NOW Lebanon RSS feeds Comment "WikiLeaks reveal flaws in US Middle East policy" Tony Badran, December 2, 2010 http://nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=220146 "To push their advantage, the Qataris found the bullet points of the Washington establishment’s narrative quite convenient. They identified as useful channels certain American political players, such as Chairman of the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee John Kerry, and proceeded through them to feed back to Washington the same discredited fantasies, acting as de facto lobbyists for the likes of the Syrians. So whereas all the other allies dismissed the notion of Syria “changing its behavior,” the Qatari emir told Kerry, who is known to have developed a rapport with Assad, that the latter was committed to “big change.” The cable describing the meeting is surreal, if completely predictable, and feels almost like a read-out of official Syrian propaganda. More distressing is that for over a year, Kerry has been the most enthusiastic advocate of pursuing this illusion. The White House’s policy has more or less done so – and has, predictably, failed miserably. It is not surprising, therefore, that what emerges from the WikiLeaks dump is a strong confirmation from the US’s closest friends that Qatar and Turkey have been America’s most problematic allies in the region – hardly a revelation. What is shocking, however, is the extent to which the White House’s official policy for the last two years ignored sound counsel from its close allies in the region. Perhaps this was a result of the administration’s natural inclinations and impulses. However, if it’s not yet abundantly clear, the foreign policy establishment’s discredited, grand strategic template needs to be shelved once and for all."

- jdyer

December 8, 2010 at 9:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

12/08/2010 - 1:37pm EDT | malahat: "Anyone else notice that the site has become almost unusably s- l- o- w?" slow, stuck, and sometimes my Avast! anti-virus warns of a malware attack, but only when I am in TNR.com. If Henrik Hertzberg were still at TNR, he could blame it on Israel. I was struck by his conflation in his Comment on "Iran and the Bomb" at http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/12/13/101213taco_talk_hertzberg?currentPage=all "...Earlier this year, a clever computer “worm,” possibly of Israeli origin, and rooted in the same technology that gives us WikiLeaks, apparently programmed Iran’s uranium-enriching centrifuges to spin so fast that some of them came apart. ..." The Stuxnet worm is "rooted in the same technology that gives us WikiLeaks"????? I guess Hertzberg drinks with Zbig. Everything is an Israeli plot. If only! sorry to go off-topic, but I have noticed intermittent problems with TNR.com's functionality which I tend to blame on something wrong with my PC.

- K2K

December 8, 2010 at 9:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Maybe those new interns can help. Oh right. The last ones couldn't, apparently. However, hope and change!

- ironyroad

December 8, 2010 at 10:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://turtlebay.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/12/06/un_human_rights_chief_declines_invite_to_nobel_peace_prize_ceremony "U.N. Human Rights chief declines invite to Nobel Peace Prize ceremony Posted By Colum Lynch Monday, December 6, 2010 - 11:30 AM Share Navi Pillay, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, has turned down an invitation to attend the Dec. 10 event at which Liu Xiaobo, the imprisoned Chinese pro-democracy advocate, will be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Pillay declined the invitation because she is already hosting a human rights day event in Geneva, her spokesman told Turtle Bay. She has no intention of sending a more junior official to represent the organization in her place, the spokesman, Rupert Colville, said. "

- noga1

December 9, 2010 at 3:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Why am I not surprised? China and the OIC outvote the West and are beginning to call the shots.

- jdyer

December 9, 2010 at 5:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There is a terrific article on attitudes held in China, by its elite, towards liberal values, in the current issue of this magazine: “Reading Strauss in Beijing:” http://www.tnr.com/article/magazine/79747/reading-leo-strauss-in-beijing-china-marx “I had heard that Strauss was popular there, as was, to my surprise, Carl Schmitt, the Weimar anti-liberal (and anti-Semitic) legal theorist.” Btw, unlike that of Carl Schmitt, Strauss’ theories don’t negate liberal ideal though he stresses republican values over democratic ones (small r and small d).

- jdyer

December 9, 2010 at 5:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8193908/Nobel-Peace-Prize-empty-chair-represents-Liu-Xiaobo-at-ceremony.html "In addition to China, the official list of absentees comprises Afghanistan, Algeria, Cuba, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Kazakhstan, Morocco, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, Venezuela, Vietnam and the Palestinian Authoritiy. " I guess they were all celebrating their absence at their favourite cantina at Moss Eisley: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BVlARaJM74

- noga1

December 10, 2010 at 4:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BVlARaJM74

- noga1

December 10, 2010 at 4:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, I wonder if you saw The Colbert Report last night -- he finally got hold of the shark story we briefly dealt with on the Entanglements thread. http://www.colbertnation.com/home

- ironyroad

December 10, 2010 at 5:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

No I didn't see it last night. I can rarely keep awake after 11:00 these days. But thanks for alerting me. I managed to watch it now on Canada's comedy channel. Trust Colbert to be able to look underneath the vowels to unearth some great conspiracies:) (When I visit Arab blogs, I am struck by the stereotypical contempt they display for Jews as stupid and at the same time there is this kind of attribution of phenomenal supernatural abilities. They don't seem to be aware that it is a contradiction.)

- noga1

December 10, 2010 at 6:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I rarely see the Colbert Report. This particular episode was funny, but I have a feeling that you could translate it into Arabic and show in Egyptian TV (and elsewhere) and people will think that Colbert was being straight and that Spielberg was part of some sort of "Jewish conspiracy." Now, given that 99.9 percent of Muslims have never met a Jew and all they know what about us is what they are being told by their governments through the media, it’s inevitable that most of them would accept these ridiculous stories as true. We seem to be living in two parallel worlds.

- jdyer

December 10, 2010 at 7:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga: (When I visit Arab blogs, I am struck by the stereotypical contempt they display for Jews as stupid and at the same time there is this kind of attribution of phenomenal supernatural abilities. They don't seem to be aware that it is a contradiction.) It's odd. Maybe there's an angle of perception one has to look for because it's not foregrounded -- they think Jews are not so much intelligent as adroit beneficiaries of some Dark Power (somewhat on the lines of the old medieval antisemitism). Otherwise, how could they do these superhuman things?

- ironyroad

December 10, 2010 at 11:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think Arabs have a different perception of what passes for common sense. I haven't encountered it in conversation with Iranians, for example. There may be disagreement but there is no disagreement about what a fact or commonsense are. With Arab bloggers there seems to be an obstacle of almost a natural source. As if they cannot understand that a stick half-immersed in the water will appear to be broken but it really is not. The entire mechanism of checking out facts or beliefs is absent, even among the most educated. The more you manage to refute a certain statement they make or like, the more angry and irrational they get. http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/0/1579/Egypt/Egyptian-media-bites-back-at-shark.aspx "As these questions were raised, giggled at, then raised again, Egypt’s papers did not fail to almost consistently accompany its shark-coverage with a picture of a great white – a considerably larger and scarier looking relative of the oceanic whitetip that is being held “responsible” for these attacks. This peculiar bestowment of responsibility onto the unthinking, instinct-driven creature reaches comic heights in the daily Rose El-Youssef, which began an article on the 3rd of December stating: “After he injured four tourists near the shores of Sharm El Sheikh, the shark fell to the nets of the Environment Ministry.” Granted, there’s no gender-neutral “it” pronoun in Arabic, yet even if this sentence could have used “it” instead, the writing still seems to indicate a presumption of intentionality on the shark’s part – as though it had the option of munching on some yellowfin tuna somewhere in the deep but opted for helpless homo sapiens instead. A popular daily talk show host appears to relay the same sentiment when she reported that the “responsible shark” was caught and killed. Of course it wasn’t, as an elderly German tourist regrettably soon found out before dying – something that put a hole in the same presenter's off-hand theory that the shark appeared to “develop an appetite for Russians.” Meanwhile, the story of the “ruthless jaw” gathered further momentum across Egypt’s news dispensers, with the privately-owned weekly Youm7 publishing no less than 14 separate articles on its online portal regarding shark-related developments on December 7 alone. A statement by the South Sinai Governor did not help in quieting things down, particularly as he was reported to be unwilling to rule out the possibility of Israel playing a hand in all this -- though, thankfully, nothing of remote-controlled sharks was mentioned. Israeli officials, on the other hand, noted that the claims were “too ludicrous” to comment on. Finally, just to exhaust all other sci-fi possibilities, the head of the Atomic Energy Authority, Mohamed El-Qalli, felt compelled yesterday to assure Egyptian news consumers that “nuclear radiation leaks kill creatures rather than excite them.” The statement was in reference to an apparently growing concern that secret nuclear testing in the area may have mutated some sharks into their more ravenous Hollywood cousins. On the other hand, the possibility that over-fishing and resource depletion are more likely explanations remains a far less lucrative story."

- noga1

December 11, 2010 at 7:19am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/0/1579/Egypt/Egyptian-media-bites-back-at-shark.aspx

- noga1

December 11, 2010 at 7:21am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I think Arabs have a different perception of what passes for common sense." I think you are right. I am always amazed how intelligent, educated and worldly Arabs believe in such nonsense. The tendency is to view every conspiracy theory, particularly regarding Jews, Israelis and America as a proven fact. Remember the disappearing penises in Sudan caused by shaking hands with Mossad agent?

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 11, 2010 at 8:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Remember the disappearing penises in Sudan caused by shaking hands with Mossad agent?" No, I looked it up, and found a whole list: http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Conspiracy_Theories

- noga1

December 11, 2010 at 10:30am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

makover “I am always amazed how intelligent, educated and worldly Arabs believe in such nonsense. The tendency is to view every conspiracy theory, particularly regarding Jews, Israelis and America as a proven fact.” Makes life easier if I can believe that the reason I live in an underdeveloped third rate country is not my fault, but it’s because my perceived enemies have conspired against me and my country. I wonder if any anthropologist has studied religious or national conspiracy theories as a kind of “cargo cult?” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult “Cargo cults tend to appear among people who covet the foreigners' equipment but are unable to obtain it easily through trade or established traditions. Members, leaders, and prophets of the cults maintain that the manufactured goods of the non-native culture have been created by spiritual means, such as through their deities and ancestors, and are intended for the local indigenous people, but that the foreigners have unfairly gained control of these objects through malice or mistake.” See also http://www.amazon.com/Ghost-Dance-Religion-Weston-Barre/dp/0881335614 “Ghost Dance: The Origins of Religion” by Weston LA Barre

- jdyer

December 11, 2010 at 12:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Back to Nobel: "From a letter from Václav Havel to Liu Xiaobo: Like probably all the signatories of the Czechoslovak Charter 77, I am naturally touched that our campaign provided inspiration for the Chinese Charter 08. I am touched not only because it recalls our own efforts of many years ago but because it is confirmation of something I have long believed, namely, that fundamental human rights and freedoms are universal values that are shared in their basic outlines by all nations and civilisations in today's world. I have had the opportunity to meet dissidents from many different countries and been surprised how similar their ideals, experiences and concerns are. And even the repertoire of persecutory skills of the authoritarian governments in their countries was strikingly similar and was totally unrelated to whether the governments in question went under a right-wing or a left-wing banner. There simply exists a sort of moral minimum that is common to the entire world and thanks to which people from countries as different and far apart as the Czech Republic and China can strive for the same values and sympathise [with] each other, thereby creating the basis for true - not simply feigned - friendship." http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog/2010/12/a-moral-minimum.html

- noga1

December 11, 2010 at 12:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Richard Hofstadter wrote a bit on conspiracy theorizing in the United States, the most famous essay being "The Paranoid Style in American Politics." This tradition was home to a strong vein of anti-Catholic and to a certain extent anti-Jewish paranoia, especially in the Populist/Progressive era of the 1890s and 1900s. The idea that bankers and foreigners were manipulating the market in precious metals (the gold standard) to ruin the economic security of farmers and small businessmen in the heartland proved to to be quite compelling. Less well known, but in some ways a better piece, is his essay on the fin-de-siècle monetary reform activist "Coin" Harvey. What is striking about American conspiratorial thinking is that it took place (at least in the modern era) during a period of great American prestige and power. The sense of being the historical loser, that seems to fire up the Arab conspiracy theories, would appear to have little purchase in the U.S. The current wave of conspiracy fantasies, e.g. about Obama, do at least take place against a background of worry about the future of America in the world (but aren't any the less loopy, of course). Curiously, there may be a kind of "positive" conspiracy theory too -- for example, beliefs around the world that, because Obama is black, he is secretly in favor of some things that he says he's against. The idea that his identity might also include being the American president in the everyday sense of the term seems not to occur to them (it's funny how the positive and negative fantasies about Obama mirror each other).

- ironyroad

December 11, 2010 at 1:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So what ironyroad seems to be saying is that there are conspiracy theories everywhere and hence there is no need to differentiate between them. We are all conspirators, now.

- jdyer

December 11, 2010 at 1:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"There simply exists a sort of moral minimum that is common to the entire world" Noga: I think that this is a Western fantasy. This sort of moral minimum is by no means universal or accepted by all cultures or countries. How was this moral minimum derived? How was it accepted and by whom? I think the Western thinkers and politicians are deluding themselves thinking that because they consider something "universal" it is necessarily so. More than half of humanity does not subscribe to Western mores of behaviour.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 11, 2010 at 1:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

makover "I think that this is a Western fantasy. This sort of moral minimum is by no means universal or accepted by all cultures or countries." Wells aid, makover. An example of a moral minimum: "Laughing Mohammad Larijani, the Comical Ali of Iran" Daniel Korski http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/6535923/laughing-mohammad-larijani-the-comical-ali-of-iran.thtml "In the week when the Iranian regime forced Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani to goulishly re-enact the murder of her husband on TV, it is worth reading Newsweek's interview with Mohammad Javad Larijani, a regime insider. His answers call to mind Comical Ali, whose delusional denials of the US advance in Iraq made everyone realise how detached from reality Saddam Hussein's regime really was. First on the matter of torture, routinely said by the UN, former prisoners and defectors to be used by Iranian officials: "Torture is forbidden by the Constitution. Any law officer who tortures civilians will meet a very harsh punishment." Of course, he admits, the Iranian system could "need refinements," but over-all it is full of checks and balances. Presumably to underscore the civility of Iran's legal system, Mr Larijani proceeds to explain, in technical tones, the process of stoning: "Stoning means to throw a limited number of stones with limited intensity to the accused, there is more than a 50 percent chance he can survive." So that's ok, then....."

- jdyer

December 11, 2010 at 2:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This: Wells aid, makover." Should be: Well said, makover.

- jdyer

December 11, 2010 at 2:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Curiously, there may be a kind of "positive" conspiracy theory too -- for example, beliefs around the world that, because Obama is black, he is secretly in favor of some things that he says he's against. " How is this different from this? "Iran: He [Mubarak] will rail against Iranian regional influence and express pessimism about U.S. outreach to Tehran. He will make clear that there should be no linkage between Israeli-Arab peace and Iran but will agree with the President’s assessment that such linkage as does exist argues for progress on the Israeli-Palestinian track to undermine Hamas and Hizballah." http://213.251.145.96/cable/2009/05/09CAIRO874.html Aren't both rationales manufactured, based on some other, unacknowledged, link between two unrelated events? Why is the former a "conspiracy" and the latter a "policy"?

- noga1

December 11, 2010 at 2:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Wells aid, makover." sounds like a tabloid headline: The famous and rather drabby aid from Wells is to undergo some radical makover in a posh Beverly Hills clinic specializing in removal and/or augmentation of all sorts of body parts.

- noga1

December 11, 2010 at 2:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm trying to post my comment again: "Curiously, there may be a kind of "positive" conspiracy theory too -- for example, beliefs around the world that, because Obama is black, he is secretly in favor of some things that he says he's against. " How is this different from this? http://213.251.145.96/cable/2009/05/09CAIRO874.html "Iran: He [Mubarak] will rail against Iranian regional influence and express pessimism about U.S. outreach to Tehran. He will make clear that there should be no linkage between Israeli-Arab peace and Iran but will agree with the President’s assessment that such linkage as does exist argues for progress on the Israeli-Palestinian track to undermine Hamas and Hizballah." Aren't both rationales manufactured, based on some other, unacknowledged, link between two unrelated events? Why is the former a "conspiracy" and the latter a "policy"?

- noga1

December 11, 2010 at 2:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

JD, of course I'm saying that every community has conspiracy theories -- would anyone deny that? -- but equally I'm definitely not saying that they shouldn't be differentiated. They can at least be differentiated on the basis of how influential they are in a particular society. But I'm a bit surprised at your comment/question, as it happens, because you yourself raised the possibility of an "anthropological" investigation of conspiracy ideas a couple of posts back. To use the term "anthropological" suggests that one is dealing with human behavior across different societies and cultures. Noga, I'm not sure I'm getting your question. My comment is about an assumption, rather than a rationale; the cable quote about Mubarak seems to be something like a report on two pieces of information, one of which will be hidden from public view behind the other. I don't know if this gets there, but Hofstadter was very careful to distinguish between conspiracies (which exist, of course) and a conspiracy theory of history (in which all events in history are covertly controlled from behind the scenes). So the Mubarak cable would be a conspiracy in a technical sense -- he will say one thing publicly while agreeing in private with the U.S. on something else -- while the belief about Obama is theoretically conspiratorial -- the world is divided by race because where I live is divided by race and everywhere is the same as where I live and thus a black president must have secret thoughts and loyalties that will benefit X or Y because he's black and it can't be otherwise.

- ironyroad

December 11, 2010 at 2:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The term that came to mind, in both instances, ironyroad, was a "Gentleman's agreement" "an informal agreement between two or more parties. It may be written, oral, or simply understood as part of an unspoken agreement by convention or through mutually beneficial etiquette."

- noga1

December 11, 2010 at 2:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ironyroad “But I'm a bit surprised at your comment/question, as it happens, because you yourself raised the possibility of an "anthropological" investigation of conspiracy ideas a couple of posts back. To use the term "anthropological" suggests that one is dealing with human behavior across different societies and cultures.” Weston La Barre, was a well regarded anthropologist, and while Richard Hofstadter was also famous it was as a political theorist not an anthropologist. The difference studies of phenomena like the cargo cult and a style of politics in an advanced society is that in that in the first case a kind of irrational and feverish belief system takes hold of most members of a mostly homogenous community and in the second case an irrational belief system that afflicts a minority of people within a larger community. Here is a fair summary of “the Paranoid Style…” from Wikipedia: “Anti-Intellectualism in American Life (1963) and The Paranoid Style in American Politics (1965) describe the provincialism in American society, warning it contains much anti-intellectual fear of the cosmopolitan city, presented as wicked by the xenophobic and anti-Semitic Populists of the 1890s. They trace the direct political and ideological lineage between the Populists and anti-communist Senator Joseph McCarthy and McCarthyism, the political paranoia manifest in his contemporary time. His dissertation director Merle Curti noted about Hofstadter that: "His position is as biased, by his urban background . . . as the work of older historians was biased by their rural background and traditional agrarian sympathies".” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hofstadter#Consensus_historian Notice that Hofstadter himself became conservative (neo conservative?) after the student rebellions of the late 60’s. There is a lot more one can say about this. For example, while one can discern features of the cargo cult like belief among many of the Tea Party members I don’t know that it encompasses the whole of their belief system. This is why Hofstadter called this phenomenon a style and not a total way of life. Ironically, as it turns out many of the anti-Communists of the early 50’s had it partially right when they talked of a communist conspiracy. What they got wrong were the details of that conspiracy.

- jdyer

December 11, 2010 at 3:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close