Memorial Day, 2013.

Media Photo

 Memorial Day - "New York Times", and U.S. News.

Media Photo



Media Photo

 

Democracy and the "rule of law."

While it is indeed possible that the state - building as the U.S. has been doing in various parts of the world to date is based on democracy and the rule of law, it might be reasonable to mention at this point the "rule of law" language could be overdone just a bit by policy makers.  Here's why:  In the utilitarian world, that is, the world espoused with utopian goals along the lines of what we know essentially to be modern or neo - liberalism even along hegelian lines, the rule of law is reduced to and atomized into the norms we all learn as individuals in school and in our experience in society on the one hand.  On the other hand, the rule of law as a principle that is elevated to overriding deity status for those who believe there is the law and only the law as enforcing the edicts of the international state and its rules and norms as pushed out to media, other states and their statesmen, and other, interested parties.  This again, is a strictly liberal view and one of systemic totemism, and the author here contrasts the global utilitarianism behind this principle with the overall conservative belief in the functions of the state in our own village as rule - maker and rule - enforcer among other things - bicameral legislature, a judiciary based upon principles such as the Bill of Rights and human rights, and a chief executive that is elected (for starters.)

 

I might be citing some high - school history book without really knowing it here, but the normativeness and the relativeness that are sometimes bred into the state as adopting above all the principle of the rule of law do engender meta - juridical functions in society and in the state in which judicial officials can abuse the overall legal considerations - those of business, culture, the arts, economics and finance, science and so on, even sports and entertainment - between society and the state as built - up that discourage proper legal procedure and action in what we see as appropriate within our scope of people living in a free society.  The unbounded legalism of the former soviet union is one such example of improper administration as brought about by the institution of utilitarian socialist superstructures, especially the judicial.  There are other, less obvious examples and though the principle of upholding the morals and norms of society has great merit, the concentration of any state administration on legal(istic) principles and practices throws it out of balance; sort of like when Beria was at the head of the party in one way or another in soviet times. 

 

Many of the difficulties in the open conflict in Afghanistan at this time call for diffusing the apparent and glaring administrative / political issues that prevent the government there from gaining more legitimacy among its people.  There are issues as well like making sure the police are properly trained to handle terrorist situations, and diffusing again the influence of the Taliban in many places.  There is also the international relationship with Pakistan and Afghanistan that has U.S. politicians worried about the stability of both countries.  Efforts so far have been to try to win hearts and minds with U.S. personnel taking the lead, though terrorism continues to be a fearful danger to everyone there and in neighboring states right now.  The Taliban as well continues to engage in violence while summarily avoiding truces and alliances with the Afghani government or provincial governments under Kabul, much less do the Taliban take part in peaceful fine - tuning as it should be at this point.  All of this might be avoided in some way or another through the recognition of some traits in Afghan society by its leaders and some cession on the topic of territoriality and provincial groups (not the Taliban here) to Kabul might be in order. 

 

The nightly news features Western - style photo opportunities for Afghani leaders, something that might be irksome to their sometimes ultra - liberal citizenry in some places, and the influences of the Western powers in the present administration there are palpable and might be annoying as popularized as well - this attempt to bring some decent organisation to the chaos in the country that has reigned for so long, even from before the soviet invasion in the 1970's, is highly commendable, though to some Afghanis the values and culture(s) of the country's society might obviously conflict with the type of legalism introduced into their system by the presumably foreign allies under our latest polity.  Another difficulty is the U.S. policy - makers up to this point have only too well understood the issues of the Middle East and Central Asia as they have been there for a long time, and through the lens of the policy - making of our own governments, the Afghanis are only too quick to point out the fissures and faults.  This has resulted apparently in an over - reliance on security forces and legal proceedings that are not equipped nor prepared on a domestic front to support the level of criminal activities that take place there, including the terrorism.  Another sub - plot in the story of the "Frog and the Scorpion," and / or the social and societal pains of state - building in foreign places where some of the citizens might not actually be interested in the "Federalist Papers" or Western norms and rules, and not out of simple ethno - centrism or cultural refutation.  

a philosophy of terror (and cultural revolution ... ?)

This past week, the leader of Al Q'aida as Osama (Oussama, etc.) bin Laden, was executed by American commandos who were able to find his hiding place near a major Pakistani military base and academy.  Many questions arise as to the way in which Mr. bin Laden was able to stay in his current surroundings for so long, apparently more than a year before his death, amidst so many of his adversaries occupying the neighboring Islamabad base.  There does not seem to be a ready explanation, although it is possible he was good at the kind of cloak and dagger, and other mysteries of character some people have to avoid captivity and execution, at least for as long as he did.  That this man is dead is no tragedy for the great powers and for the rest of the world that fears international terror and mayhem.  Bin Laden was an unrepentant and uncontrolled animal who sought the destruction probably of most things Western and those in particular that pained his eyes or his whim about western culture and its attempts to absorb and reconcile the long - standing tendencies and abuses of oriental culture that are so rife, but that are so little spoken, much less written about, even in this time of prolific press reports and the clamoring for transparency of political ideas be they of the majority or the opposition in many systems.

That bin Laden was a Saudi Arabian citizen, and that he met his end as he did obviously gives great pain to his following, but it might also be painful for spectators and onlookers to see how the sword of Damocles fell on this person, and probably definitively as well on his terrorist organisation:  There are paradoxes to the death of any major terrorist - criminal (i.e., Abu Nidal,)  and the overall philosophy of death around Al Q'aida, and if they have not already been defined in talks with, for instance, Fouad Ajami and Abbas Milani, they need to be examined before the public eye and disseminated as simply as possible in order that there be no resurgence of this culture or philosophy of terror, violence and death as originating in the Afghani countryside during soviet times.  There is a political argument, tangibly marxist, that the Taliban were left to be victimised by everybody once the soviets left Afghanistan and their American security forces allies had left the country as well.  It was probably that after the reign of Babrak Karmel ended, that many Afghanis, in fact many people in the region overall did believe the Americans would start arriving in their C - 5A transports with money and gifts for the Taliban (every single one) once the soviets had left in 1979.  Unfortunately, this view proved to be on the level of fantasy as the Americans wanted the Taliban to try to build up their own country in their own way, and as most countries had done since the beginning of the industrial revolution in the late 1800's.  Also unfortunately, the Taliban apparently believed their allying with the American security forces during the conflict with the soviets would provoke or invite this promise from either the Carter or subsequent Reagan administrations.  When these dreams for them went unfulfilled, they used their turncoat behaviour over time as a type of blackmail, not that they were in the least guided by Islamic ideas and theology, but the Taliban and some of the mujadheen and other islamists figured they could extort political currency by using bin Laden's treasury (and other moneys of other less wealth people) to become like a super - charged Hezbollah.  The Taliban has had their own kind of Islam that is quite orthodox and includes anyone as their enemy, not just as targeting Israel and the Hebrew tribes, but anyone who engaged them in any sort of confrontation, apparently even adversarial verbal exchanges or simple arguments.  Bin Laden's method was to use what is essentially believed to be family wealth to raise an army and the funds to corrupt and destroy through terror as many of his western adversaries as possible, regardless of their mutual alliances or confluence of goals in reviewing the situation of islamists in the world, and regardless of their accommodation(s) to him, or any convergence of ideas they shared or would share.

It is well - known that Saudi people are wonderful people.  In many ways, the Saudis have been better to Americans than, for example, other countries of the Western Hemisphere, without naming in particular any citizens in our diverse global village.  It was surprising for the author of this blog to find that most of the 9 / 11 bombers were Saudi as the widely held expectation and perception at the time of 9 / 11 was the perpetrators of the airline crashes in in the Eastern U.S. were arabic palestinians as radical islamists.  Many of the Saudis are devout islamists themselves and would never raise a hand against anyone as it is written in their scriptures that such actions are unlawful according to Mohammed and invite severe punishment(s.)  The Saudis are by and large very educated and cultured people, and they are sophisticated enough to know what is going on in the world, especially those running their country.  The present author, with this in mind, presents the point of view, to islamists as radicals and reformers alike, that there was born midway in the last century a generation in most Arab countries that came of age belying the reputations and moral high ground of their parents - they stood as if on the shoulders of their own giants at a very young and intrinsically wealthy age, and it is obvious their parents did not believe this to be a redeeming or constructive thing to do.  They sought to preserve their children as a result and sent them to the best schools to get the best training in order that they succeed on their merits as earned.  Bin Laden and his colleagues, despite their great sums were with these young people who were crippled and stifled into being terrorists among others by the discipline and tasks and duties of being subject to the vagaries of radicals in school, the will of their responsible parent for a structured life in view of radical sympathies, and so forth, and what (at least in part) Francis Fukuyama put on the cover of his first well - known book "The End of History" as handed down to them by their elders.  This is only part of the story as many of the adverbial characterisations and reasons even, the "why's," and so forth, are lost even to those of bin Laden's followers who were good diarists.  A simple explanation of what this evil is or was about is in the critically acclaimed and controversial poetry of Baudelaire and Mallarme, writers that bin Laden read or undoubtedly knew of through his studies.  There is an alternative and contributory explanation to these views that hinges on the role of Middle Eastern culture as dominated and governed by orthodox Mohammedan beliefs and the like, but this is beyond the scope of simple blog entries at this point.

People like me do not feel sorry that he is gone; no one like me who has family and friends who are in the world and threatened by blindly terrorist acts against the great powers aimed at crippling and even destroying our culture as we know it and us, ourselves, in addition to that has any remorse about what happened at that Islamabad base last weekend.  It will be perhaps trying in the short run for U.S. / Pakistani relations that their domestic airspace and other civic attributes were used in an act of war to which the populace might not have been entirely committed, though more Pakistanis stood to die in the terror wars without this happening, with everybody taking their risks as they did, even our enemies.  There is a simple story about Mohammed moving a mountain that everyone reading in English needs to review, not as a story of scripture, but as a story about how the radicals in the Middle East might now perceive their place among others at this point.   It is a dangerous thought to wonder how these radicals, islamists, and fascists or marxist, or in between, might attempt to impress this tale on us now their great teacher and leader's life has ended. 

THS