Thursday, 18 December 2008
Hiatus
Not that I've been terribly active recently, but back to Dublin this week to visit with the family. Posting will be light. er.
Saturday, 13 December 2008
Stasis
Yes yes, its been a long time since I've blogged. Haven't really been in the mood I guess. And have also been doing some Christmas shopping.
To be clear - when I am King the first edict I decree shall be a ban on all books titled - "Current Social Crisis: how one particular group/business/phenomenon is responsible for all our problems and how buying my book will solve it."
Seriously - there are several dozen books out about the Credit Crunch already, 90% of them with proposed solutions. Fuck off to No.11 or the Obama Transition Team if you're so smart then.
To be clear - when I am King the first edict I decree shall be a ban on all books titled - "Current Social Crisis: how one particular group/business/phenomenon is responsible for all our problems and how buying my book will solve it."
Seriously - there are several dozen books out about the Credit Crunch already, 90% of them with proposed solutions. Fuck off to No.11 or the Obama Transition Team if you're so smart then.
Monday, 1 December 2008
What he said
If you're not reading Ta-Nehisi Coate's blog... well you really really should. The man is a fine writer as well as intellectually rigorous and honest. This post in particularly really struck a chord with me. Specifically I love the way Coates specifically calls out that a) cliches and obvious analogies are more than bad writing, they're a method of control by placing blinders on one's diagnostic pathways, b) are only possible because so many journalists have decided to abandon the principle aspect of their job, representing reality as it is, because of laziness or simple disrespect. And he writes it much better than I just did too!
The Race for 24 Sussex Drive
So less than two months after 'winning' the last Canadian election, it looks like Stephen Harper's spectacularly cynical attempt to withdraw public financing for Canadian political parties has spurred on a Liberal-NDP coalition that may drive him from power. Good riddance IMHO.
But there's been a lot of talk in Canada about the potential for a 'constitutional crisis' and questions abound over what kind of moral authority the Grits and the NDP have to form a new government. My take goes something like this:
a) From the perspective of the popular vote share, the Liberal-NDP 'coalition in waiting' has a strong mandate to govern. It received more votes than the Tories, and if we discount the sovereigntist vote for the BQ, it has close to an absolute majority. However that's not how the game is played in Canada, and Dion unquestionably lost the election - that's why the NDP and Grits have about 30 fewer seats between them than the Tories. Granted, this is a function of Canada's terrible electoral system - in a proportional system the Liberals, NDP and Greens between them would have just about enough seats to form a government. But voting systems have a heavy influence on voter behaviour, party behaviour and political ideology. Simply transposing the results under a faulty system to a preferred one and extrapolating the results does not a mandate make. Overall however, I think the Liberal-NDP coalition can and should go ahead, rather than another election.
b) Coalition government has never really been tried before in the modern era. If the terms of the deal which have leaked so far are true, NDP will have cabinet seats and real power for the first time in their political history. This carries with it the risk that politicians who have never before even had the hope of operating complex government ministries will suddenly find themselves at the controls during a time of political and economic crisis (the latter of which will likely endure for years.) There's little margin for error. However, giving the NDP actual responsibility as a governing party could help bring the party further into the Canadian mainstream by 'acclimatising' it to the realities of the political process. Additionally, breaking the taboo on coalitions can only help to lessen the 'zero-sum' nature of current Canadian politics and hopefully encourage a longer term alliance between the Liberals and NDP to counteract a Tory party which still enjoys the support of just over a third of the country. But it is a jump into the dark for a political system and elite that has never tried this kind of thing before.
c) This further highlights the problem of the Bloc Quebecois and its role in parliament. The sovereigntists are already massively overrepresented in parliament as it is, and their role as a regional 'spoiler' party gives them far too much power within the system as a result. Creating a workable majority in the Canadian parliament has become increasingly difficult due to their presence, threatening the continued stability of Canada as a whole.
Now this rather silly situation is quite normal in functioning parliamentary democracies - after all, the people technically vote for representatives who then choose the government, not a government itself - but would never have come aboout where it not for Canada's absurdly anachronistic voting system. It would be nice to see if one of the parties, or indeed members of the Canuck punditocracy would point this out, but I'm not holding my breath. For more good coverage, check out CalgaryGrit.
But there's been a lot of talk in Canada about the potential for a 'constitutional crisis' and questions abound over what kind of moral authority the Grits and the NDP have to form a new government. My take goes something like this:
a) From the perspective of the popular vote share, the Liberal-NDP 'coalition in waiting' has a strong mandate to govern. It received more votes than the Tories, and if we discount the sovereigntist vote for the BQ, it has close to an absolute majority. However that's not how the game is played in Canada, and Dion unquestionably lost the election - that's why the NDP and Grits have about 30 fewer seats between them than the Tories. Granted, this is a function of Canada's terrible electoral system - in a proportional system the Liberals, NDP and Greens between them would have just about enough seats to form a government. But voting systems have a heavy influence on voter behaviour, party behaviour and political ideology. Simply transposing the results under a faulty system to a preferred one and extrapolating the results does not a mandate make. Overall however, I think the Liberal-NDP coalition can and should go ahead, rather than another election.
b) Coalition government has never really been tried before in the modern era. If the terms of the deal which have leaked so far are true, NDP will have cabinet seats and real power for the first time in their political history. This carries with it the risk that politicians who have never before even had the hope of operating complex government ministries will suddenly find themselves at the controls during a time of political and economic crisis (the latter of which will likely endure for years.) There's little margin for error. However, giving the NDP actual responsibility as a governing party could help bring the party further into the Canadian mainstream by 'acclimatising' it to the realities of the political process. Additionally, breaking the taboo on coalitions can only help to lessen the 'zero-sum' nature of current Canadian politics and hopefully encourage a longer term alliance between the Liberals and NDP to counteract a Tory party which still enjoys the support of just over a third of the country. But it is a jump into the dark for a political system and elite that has never tried this kind of thing before.
c) This further highlights the problem of the Bloc Quebecois and its role in parliament. The sovereigntists are already massively overrepresented in parliament as it is, and their role as a regional 'spoiler' party gives them far too much power within the system as a result. Creating a workable majority in the Canadian parliament has become increasingly difficult due to their presence, threatening the continued stability of Canada as a whole.
Now this rather silly situation is quite normal in functioning parliamentary democracies - after all, the people technically vote for representatives who then choose the government, not a government itself - but would never have come aboout where it not for Canada's absurdly anachronistic voting system. It would be nice to see if one of the parties, or indeed members of the Canuck punditocracy would point this out, but I'm not holding my breath. For more good coverage, check out CalgaryGrit.
Thursday, 27 November 2008
Rumsfeld Smackdown
Fred Kaplan has an excellent take down of Donald Rumsfeld's recent NYT op-ed, in which the disgraced former Sec Def argues he was essentially right about everything, ever, during his tenure at the Pentagon.
Rumsfeld has more or less dropped out of sight since his ignominous dismissal back in 2006, which is paradoxically a great shame. From the fiasco surrounding the Taguba Report, to Team B, to the Iraq War itself, Rumsfeld has consistently shown himself to be both a criminal and a serial incompetent, a combination that has resulted in untold numbers of deaths. In fact, only the Buffalo Beast can do the man proper justice:
But there's just about no-one as universally be-loathed inside and out of America than Rummy. If a head is to roll, even if purely in the name of symbolism, let it be his. Literally billions of people have endured the past eight years nursing a deep sense of loathing against an administration whose crimes arguably far outstrip those of Nixon. Catharsis is needed, and while it might be unfair to single out somebody as a whipping boy in normal circumstances, Rumsfeld's numerous criminal acts are sufficient to over-ride any moral qualms about making him a scapegoat.
Rumsfeld has more or less dropped out of sight since his ignominous dismissal back in 2006, which is paradoxically a great shame. From the fiasco surrounding the Taguba Report, to Team B, to the Iraq War itself, Rumsfeld has consistently shown himself to be both a criminal and a serial incompetent, a combination that has resulted in untold numbers of deaths. In fact, only the Buffalo Beast can do the man proper justice:
At least Herman Goering knew how to conquer people. Rummy is the richest person in the white house, a former auto and pharmaceutical CEO and the one who nurtured Dick Cheney’s career. So rife with corruption and fascist desire he makes dirt look clean. Carries himself in press conferences like a cranky grandfather who is sick of hearing his daughters whine about how he molested them every now and then.There's been a lot of chatter recently about how Obama is unlikely to initiate the kind of blanket criminal investigations the Bush administration so richly deserves, in the name of bipartisanship and turning the page. This I think, is largely the right move, if a deeply regrettable one.
But there's just about no-one as universally be-loathed inside and out of America than Rummy. If a head is to roll, even if purely in the name of symbolism, let it be his. Literally billions of people have endured the past eight years nursing a deep sense of loathing against an administration whose crimes arguably far outstrip those of Nixon. Catharsis is needed, and while it might be unfair to single out somebody as a whipping boy in normal circumstances, Rumsfeld's numerous criminal acts are sufficient to over-ride any moral qualms about making him a scapegoat.
Wednesday, 26 November 2008
More From The Department Of Things Its Really Difficult to Feel Bad About
Deranged, anorexic, quasi-fascist demagogue Ann Coulter (a.k.a. Brown Shirt Barbie) has had her jaw broken and wired shut. The Department of Ironic Punishment could not have done a better job.
In celebration of this joyous happening I offer up the following YouTube clip (with a H/T from NC)
In celebration of this joyous happening I offer up the following YouTube clip (with a H/T from NC)
Organ Harvesting in Albania?
There have been a few stories recently about ICTY prosecutor Carla Del Ponte's allegations that the Kosovo Liberation Army operated an organ smuggling ring out of the mountains of Albania after the close of the war.
Del Ponte's allegations, if true, are highly disturbing - she is claiming that as many as 400 Serb soldiers were kidnapped by KLA forces and murdered for their vital organs which were then sold on through Tirana. As a result PACE is moving forward with an investigation.
Now I don't want to rush to judgement on this case but there are a couple of aspects of this story that simply don't add up. First off, and most importantly once an organ is removed from the body it has a definite 'use-by' date, often within the range of 24 hours. The allegations made by Del Ponte suggest that operations were undertaken in the mountains of northern Albania and then moved to Tirana for shipment by plane. Albanian infrastructure is notoriously shoddy, and the likelihood that organs could be moved from isolated locales with the rapidity required for such an operation is low.
Secondly, investigators have claimed to find blood traces, medication and overalls consistent with some form of medical operations in a number of houses. However, it is much more likely that these houses were being used as KLA field hospitals for wounded guerillas, or at the very least a plausible alternative explanation.
Thirdly, where are the buyers? This relates to the first point in that organ transfers are a 'just-in-time' operation. It is not feasible to store organs and wait for a buyer. If Del Ponte's allegations and PACE's investigation are going to be credible, their going to have to produce an actual organ recipient at some point, since presumably all of the alleged 'donors' are no longer alive.
Del Ponte and ICTY have done excellent work under trying circumstances, and I'm certainly sympathetic to her claims that the war crimes process has been heavily politicised and the 'blame' for the conflict unfairly shifted onto the Serbs. But this whole story has a funny smell to it - partially out of a misplaced need to 'balance' the reporting of crimes from the former Yugoslavia, and partially legal investigators jumping to conclusions without proper medical evidence. Running an operation like this would be an incredibly difficult and require a high degree of sophisticated logistical and technical planning, all allegedly provided by a guerilla army working in the remotest regions of one of the poorest countries in Europe. By all means PACE should investigate, but with a healthy degree of scepticism.
Del Ponte's allegations, if true, are highly disturbing - she is claiming that as many as 400 Serb soldiers were kidnapped by KLA forces and murdered for their vital organs which were then sold on through Tirana. As a result PACE is moving forward with an investigation.
Now I don't want to rush to judgement on this case but there are a couple of aspects of this story that simply don't add up. First off, and most importantly once an organ is removed from the body it has a definite 'use-by' date, often within the range of 24 hours. The allegations made by Del Ponte suggest that operations were undertaken in the mountains of northern Albania and then moved to Tirana for shipment by plane. Albanian infrastructure is notoriously shoddy, and the likelihood that organs could be moved from isolated locales with the rapidity required for such an operation is low.
Secondly, investigators have claimed to find blood traces, medication and overalls consistent with some form of medical operations in a number of houses. However, it is much more likely that these houses were being used as KLA field hospitals for wounded guerillas, or at the very least a plausible alternative explanation.
Thirdly, where are the buyers? This relates to the first point in that organ transfers are a 'just-in-time' operation. It is not feasible to store organs and wait for a buyer. If Del Ponte's allegations and PACE's investigation are going to be credible, their going to have to produce an actual organ recipient at some point, since presumably all of the alleged 'donors' are no longer alive.
Del Ponte and ICTY have done excellent work under trying circumstances, and I'm certainly sympathetic to her claims that the war crimes process has been heavily politicised and the 'blame' for the conflict unfairly shifted onto the Serbs. But this whole story has a funny smell to it - partially out of a misplaced need to 'balance' the reporting of crimes from the former Yugoslavia, and partially legal investigators jumping to conclusions without proper medical evidence. Running an operation like this would be an incredibly difficult and require a high degree of sophisticated logistical and technical planning, all allegedly provided by a guerilla army working in the remotest regions of one of the poorest countries in Europe. By all means PACE should investigate, but with a healthy degree of scepticism.
Saturday, 15 November 2008
Public School for the Obamas?
There's been a bit of speculation over whether Barack and Michelle Obama will choose to enroll their daughters in DC public schools, and pretty good arguments being made both pro and contra. However they've been largely focused on the seeming tension between ensuring the girls get a good education and the 'message' such a move would send.
What no-one seems to have brought up at this point is what it would mean for the schools themselves. A number of close friends and family members of mine are teachers. They have all complained to me at one time or another about how much of their time and energy is often consumed by one or two particularly taxing students in a class. This isn't necessarily due to bad behaviour - some students just require more attention than others. As a result other students in class suffer, simply due to the fact that the teacher has a finite amount of time to give in class.
Now how much time do you think the average teacher, when responsible for the education and well-being of members of the First Family, is gonna devote to the other kids in his or her class?
For better or for worse, Sasha and Malia Obama are now heavily at risk of abduction (or worse) by those who would seek to threaten the US and the President. They will require constant and pervasive protection and surveillance. While this is of course provided by the Secret Service it will still place tremendous administrative pressures on whatever school hosts them. This is all in a context of schools that are lacking in administrative capacity in the first place.
While I'd love to hear more from a few public school teachers my feeling is that putting the Obamas in public school is unlikely to be to the benefit of either side.
What no-one seems to have brought up at this point is what it would mean for the schools themselves. A number of close friends and family members of mine are teachers. They have all complained to me at one time or another about how much of their time and energy is often consumed by one or two particularly taxing students in a class. This isn't necessarily due to bad behaviour - some students just require more attention than others. As a result other students in class suffer, simply due to the fact that the teacher has a finite amount of time to give in class.
Now how much time do you think the average teacher, when responsible for the education and well-being of members of the First Family, is gonna devote to the other kids in his or her class?
For better or for worse, Sasha and Malia Obama are now heavily at risk of abduction (or worse) by those who would seek to threaten the US and the President. They will require constant and pervasive protection and surveillance. While this is of course provided by the Secret Service it will still place tremendous administrative pressures on whatever school hosts them. This is all in a context of schools that are lacking in administrative capacity in the first place.
While I'd love to hear more from a few public school teachers my feeling is that putting the Obamas in public school is unlikely to be to the benefit of either side.
Thursday, 13 November 2008
Plastic Houses and Tin Top Hats
My good friend Hal has been lobbying me to do a post on the financial crisis. Unfortunately I don't really have anything interesting to add beyond a few screams of 'OH MY GOD, WTF!' as I'm not really an economist. However, my own feeling is that when people begin to spend enormous amounts of money on seriously stupid shit, catastrophe is never far along the road.
In that vein, I'm pleased to announce that Ridley Scott has been signed to direct a multi-million dollar film adaptation of Monopoly. Yes, the board game.
In that vein, I'm pleased to announce that Ridley Scott has been signed to direct a multi-million dollar film adaptation of Monopoly. Yes, the board game.
Bashir
There's been a bit of movement in Darfur over the past 24 hours, since Sudanese president Omar Al-Bashir declared a unilateral ceasefire yesterday. Unfortunately it seems that it hasn't come to much so far, but hope springs eternal.
What is more interesting is the fact that Bashir seems to have made the offer as a means of heading off the ICC's expected indictment of him for genocide and crimes against humanity. I was quite critical of the ICC's decision to indict Bashir initially, believing it would do nothing but tie the hands of negotiators and discourage him from any form of serious engagement, while not actually providing any real sanction. It now seems I was more or less completely wrong, and happy to be so.
If ICC indictments evolve into a serious and credible means of normatively sanctioning state leaders, then we're into a situation where 'international law' as a concept really begins to put on some weight. I'll probably have some more thoughts on what this means for IR in a future post.
What is more interesting is the fact that Bashir seems to have made the offer as a means of heading off the ICC's expected indictment of him for genocide and crimes against humanity. I was quite critical of the ICC's decision to indict Bashir initially, believing it would do nothing but tie the hands of negotiators and discourage him from any form of serious engagement, while not actually providing any real sanction. It now seems I was more or less completely wrong, and happy to be so.
If ICC indictments evolve into a serious and credible means of normatively sanctioning state leaders, then we're into a situation where 'international law' as a concept really begins to put on some weight. I'll probably have some more thoughts on what this means for IR in a future post.
Klaus in the Haus
The Irish department of Foreign Affairs is rightly fuming after Czech President Vaclav Klaus' state visit this week. After describing millionaire crack-pot and Libertas founder Declan Ganley as a 'dissident' during a press conference, he went on to criticise the Irish government's position on the future of the Lisbon treaty. After being rightly criticised of an 'inappropriate intervention' into Irish domestic politics, he went on to call Irish Foreign Minister Micheal Martin a 'hypocrite.' All in all, a diplomatic clusterfuck for the Czechs, who take over the EU presidency in January.
What's missing in the Irish papers so far is a bit of background on Mr. Klaus. Essentially he's been Moscow's biggest cheer-leader and enabler within the EU. He's taken the Kremlin's side on just about every issue of note during his tenure (including the Georgian war and Kosova) and has thus far been valuably rewarded, both in monetary and prestige terms. Just about every Czech I've talked to here in Oxford is convinced he's the next Gerhard Schroder, with a comfy Gazprom sinecure awaiting him when he retires from politics.
This is troubling: The source of Libertas' funding is still highly unclear, and while Ganley has been accused of accepting funds from US military contractors and CIA sources, Russia probably makes more sense. It has a vested interest in stopping the Lisbon treaty going forward, and there is at least some history of Russian funding of Irish political parties.
I don't want to jump to conclusions here - Libertas is likely a legitimate political lobby group, and Ganley's claims that its funding is '100% Irish' are probably true. But the Klaus affair shows that Libertas and Ganley have at minimum, extremely poor judgement in their choice political alliances. With Russia pursuing a policy of funding and supporting anti-integrationist parties within the EU, its time to open the books on Libertas to put a few minds at ease.
What's missing in the Irish papers so far is a bit of background on Mr. Klaus. Essentially he's been Moscow's biggest cheer-leader and enabler within the EU. He's taken the Kremlin's side on just about every issue of note during his tenure (including the Georgian war and Kosova) and has thus far been valuably rewarded, both in monetary and prestige terms. Just about every Czech I've talked to here in Oxford is convinced he's the next Gerhard Schroder, with a comfy Gazprom sinecure awaiting him when he retires from politics.
This is troubling: The source of Libertas' funding is still highly unclear, and while Ganley has been accused of accepting funds from US military contractors and CIA sources, Russia probably makes more sense. It has a vested interest in stopping the Lisbon treaty going forward, and there is at least some history of Russian funding of Irish political parties.
I don't want to jump to conclusions here - Libertas is likely a legitimate political lobby group, and Ganley's claims that its funding is '100% Irish' are probably true. But the Klaus affair shows that Libertas and Ganley have at minimum, extremely poor judgement in their choice political alliances. With Russia pursuing a policy of funding and supporting anti-integrationist parties within the EU, its time to open the books on Libertas to put a few minds at ease.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
