Iraq President Nouri al-Maliki’s attention remains divided.
The Iraqi army likely can’t reverse the gains ISIS has made. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)
In the New York Times, Eric Schmitt and Eric Gordon report:
At a Pentagon news conference on July 3, General Dempsey noted the while Iraqi security forces had stiffened and were capable of defending Baghdad, they were not capable on their own of launching a counteroffensive and reversing the ISIS gains.
Its deterrent effect is lost on the Israel Defense Force.
In the end Hamas rockets do more harm to Hamas than Israel. (Photo: Amir Farshad Ebrahimi / Flickr)
By nature I’m sympathetic to the Palestinians simply because they’re an occupied state. On the other hand, I’m leery of Hamas especially because they launch attacks from civilian areas. Of course, it’s a tactic long employed by guerilla groups. The logic is two-fold:
1. The presence of civilians, aka human shields, will give an enemy, especially one that claims to be reluctant to cause civilian casualties, pause before striking and thus act as a deterrent.
2. Even if it doesn’t deter, civilians killed will turn world sentiment against your enemy.
Nearly 8,000 Muslims were massacred in Srebrenica between July 11 and 13, 1995.
Citizens of the Bosnian Serb Republic, as well as all East-Central Europe, need to realize that ultra-nationalism serves no purpose. (Photo: cvrcak1 / Flickr)
Every year in July, the memories of the Srebrenica Massacre swell anew and bring tears to not just Bosniaks but anyone who has even an ounce of humanity left in him/her. Years go by, debates keep happening, and we keep telling ourselves that humanity is not yet dead.
Between 1992 and 1995, over 100,000 innocent civilians of Bosnia lost their lives. In the town of Srebrenica, nearly 8000 Muslims were massacred between July 11 and 13 in the year 1995.
Yes, Srebrenica was a protected UN Safe Area. There was a Dutch peacekeeping force stationed in the region and their job was to protect the refugees in and around Srebrenica. Needless to say, the peacekeepers failed.
The New Testament is like the PG-13 version of the life and teachings of the historical Jesus.
The Sea of Galilee: stomping ground of Christ and his disciples. (Photo: Daniel Weber / Flickr)
(Though this post may seem tangential, at best, to foreign affairs, at least its set in Palestine and Israel, areas crucial to U.S. foreign policy.)
Few are aware of the impact of Jesus’s brother James, often overshadowed by Peter and Paul, on Christianity. After the death of Jesus, he led the early Christian community for nearly three decades. In Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth (Random House, 2013), about which I posted recently, Reza Aslan wrote that “one sure way of uncovering what Jesus may have believed is to determine what his brother James believed.” How “may” not just qualifies, but contradicts, “sure way” must have gotten by an editor. We can be sure of little about times and regions that were sparsely documented. That said, the “first thing to note about James’s epistle,” continues Azlan
A new generation of Polish progressives seeks to rescue liberalism from popular misconceptions.
Karolina Wigura, head of the political section of Kultura Liberalna, believes the meaning of liberalism is “rather fuzzy” in Poland. (Photo: John Feffer)
Cross-posted from JohnFeffer.com.
Liberalism took a beating in Poland in the 20th century. It was overwhelmed by nationalism in the 1930s, by Nazi occupation in the 1940s, and by a succession of Communist governments during the Cold War period. Finally, when the full political spectrum was restored to the country after 1989, liberalism became almost exclusively associated with its neo-liberal variant. For most Poles, “liberal” meant economic austerity and its accompanying hardships. Not surprisingly, liberalism acquired a negative connotation in the era of democracy as well.
But today in Poland, a new generation of political actors has taken up the challenge of rescuing liberalism from the misconceptions of the past. Kultura Liberalna is a weekly magazine established in 2009. It has spawned a website as well as an intellectual circle that has attracted a younger set of academics and intellectuals who are committed to restoring liberalism to its fullest meaning.
Did Sarkozy accept campaign funds from Qaddafi — and worse?
Sarkozy may have been even more morally bankrupt than the other two Transatlantic neocons: Bush and Blair. (Photo: Moritz Hager, World Economic Forum / Flickr)
“Anticorruption authorities,” reports the New York Times, are investigating via phone tapping, among other things, whether former French President Nicolas Sarkozy and his lawyer“sought information from a judge about the progress of an investigation of the financing for his 2007 election campaign.” To wit:
Mr. Sarkozy has been dogged by the accusation that the campaign received up to 50 million euros, or about $68 million, in illegal funds from Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi of Libya.
Also, BBC reported recently that his interpreter Moftah Missouri said Qaddafi“himself told me personally, verbally, that Libya had transferred about $20m” to Sarkozy’s campaign.
The underlying issues that led to violence in Kyrgyzstan four years ago remain.
Scars from the 2010 violence are still fresh in Kyrgyzstan. (Photo: Johannes Zielcke / Flickr)
Recently, Kyrgyzstan commemorated the fourth anniversary of the violence that shook its southern part back in 2010. Back then, over 100,000 Uzbeks had to leave Kyrgyzstan and seek refuge in Uzbekistan in the aftermath of the riots.
It all started as a simple brawl between groups of Kyrgyz and Uzbek youngsters in a casino in the city of Osh. Shortly thereafter, it took the form of a full-fledged ethnic violence. Many issues were highlighted by the incidents of 2010: Kyrgyzstan’s ever-subtle struggle for power and resources between the elites of Bishkek and their southern counterparts from Osh and Jalalabad, and the acute economic inequality between different communities, especially in the southern region of the country.
Reporter David Crawford exposed the Stasi’s real estate assets, pensions, and the names of its agents working undercover.
The one-time headquarters of the Stasi. (Photo: John Out and About / Flickr)
Cross-posted from JohnFeffer.com.
The great riddle of German reunification involves the two dogs that didn’t bark. The first dog was the Stasi, the East German secret service, which did so little to prevent the demonstrations of 1989 from bringing down Party chief Erich Honecker, the Berlin Wall, and then the entire Communist regime. The second dog was the East German people, who exacted so little revenge against the Stasi after the once-powerful institution was unmasked. Of course, there may well be a relationship between these two dogs. After all, dogs often bark in response to one another.
The first dog didn’t bark, it seems, because the Stasi expected some kind of deal that would have prolonged the life of the East German state with West German cash. It was not an entirely unrealistic expectation. The West German government had paid for all sorts of things in the past, including the exit of East Germans and the dismantling of the automated tripwire at the Wall.
However vindictive and mule-headed, Prime Minister Maliki doesn’t deserve all the blame for the success of ISIS in Iraq.
There’s plenty of blame to go around for ISIS’s progress in Iraq. (Photo: State Department / Flickr)
Everyone wants to blame Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki for the military success of ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham) in Iraq. For instance, appearing on Fox News,
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) criticized the U.S. for arming “Islamic rebels who kill Christians” in Syria and who are now militant in Iraq and said “the person most culpable” for the crisis in Iraq is President Maliki. Paul hit back at Sean Hannity’s oversimplification of the Iraq crisis and attempts to blame President Obama and Democrats on Hannity’s radio show this week.
Were Christ and his followers early jihadists?
In the end, martyrdom on the cross was a lot more effective than martyrdom by suicide bombing. (Photo: Random House)
The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham recently announced the formation of a new caliphate — or empire, if you will — comprising the existing states in the Muslim world. Its leader, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, will act as the caliph — or emperor, if you will.I’m currently reading Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth by Reza Aslan (Random House, 2013) and it occurs to me that ISIS’ announcement is not unlike Jesus Christ proclaiming the Kingdom of God with, like al Baghdadi, himself as the king.
Where exactly do Christ and his disciples fit on the scale of religious extremism? Islam has its Sunni jihadists and, in China, militant Uighurs. Buddhism has its 969 Movement in Burma that attacks Rohingya Muslims and, in Sri Lanka, the Buddhist Power Force also targets Muslims. The United States has its Christian fundamentalists who kill abortion-killing doctors. The quantities in which each kills varies, from one at a time to hundreds and even thousands (9/11) at a time. But killing is killing.