The Middle East is current being roiled by political upheaval. But is this a sign of budding democracy...or does it foreshadow the spread of Islamic fundamentalism? Actually, the reality is that the situation is extremely complex...and defies simplistic answers.
The signs pointing toward democracy include the young leaders in Egypt who helped toppled Mubarak. And yet, while the revolution in Egypt was not initially led by the Muslim Brotherhood, they are now trying to capitalize on the situation. So even if the revolution began by those wanting democracy, there is no guarantee that the end result will be a more democratic country.
Signs of democracy might also include the recent unrest in Libya and Iran. Neither of these nations is remotely allied with the U.S. or Israel, so the unrest is not an Islamic reaction to any pro-Western leanings in either country. Rather, this revolt is being fueled by those who don't like the abuses of very dictatorial regimes that are Islamic in nature.
One clear difference between the unrest in these different countries is their response. Those countries more oriented to the West are being pressured not to respond harshly or crack down on the dissidents. So far this has resulted in the ouster of Mubarak, and it is currently causing serious problems for Yemen, Bahrain, and Jordan. In contrast, countries like Libya and Iran have responded to the unrest with mass arrests and live ammunition. The West has condemned these actions, but there is little else they can do.
In once sense it looks like the West's insistence on a liberal, western approach to individual rights is actually threatening to undermine those regimes that are most friendly to the West. And the alternative might very well be administrations that are equally as repressive...but far less friendly. So should the goal of our government be to force countries to adopt our standards for individual liberties even if it threatens their continued existence, or should our goal be to support those governments that are friendly to the West...even if those governments don't hold to the same standards of democracy and personal liberty as us?
The choice is not as simplistic as some might think...and our country needs to work through the situation very carefully...or we might find ourselves in the Middle East with no democracy--and no allies.
Showing posts with label Middle East. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Middle East. Show all posts
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Sunday, January 30, 2011
The Law of Unintended Consequences
In my 30+ years of educational administration I saw firsthand how the law of unintended consequences works. People make decisions without fully comprehending all the ramifications. As a result, actions taken to solve one problem lead to more serious problems that were totally unforeseen and unexpected...but that become obvious in hindsight.
So what does this have to do with the Middle East? Simply this. Could the current riots in the Middle East have been caused, in part, by our attempt to become less dependent on Middle East oil? Let me explain. In 2007 the price of oil began a two-year rise that took it from $45 a barrel to $147 a barrel. One reaction to the rise in oil prices was a rush toward biofuels. President Bush and Congress committed to slashing fossil fuel consumption 20% by 2017, in part by generating 35 billion gallons of alternative fuels. America jumped on the biofuel bandwagon, and within two years 25% of all U.S. grain crops were being used to produce ethanol.
Now comes the law of unintended consequences.
The diversion of grain to ethanol resulted in a grain shortage...and a corresponding spike in grain prices. This shortage has been further compounded by weather problems in grain producing countries like Russia, Australia, and the United States over the past few years which reduced the total harvest. Grain production dropped while an ever-higher percentage of the grain that was harvested was used to produce ethanol. And the result has been rising food prices.
We see the impact on our grocery bill as a minor irritation. But for those living in poverty in countries like Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, Jordan, Iran, or Syria these rising prices make life's basic necessities unaffordable.
And that leads to riots!
So what does this have to do with the Middle East? Simply this. Could the current riots in the Middle East have been caused, in part, by our attempt to become less dependent on Middle East oil? Let me explain. In 2007 the price of oil began a two-year rise that took it from $45 a barrel to $147 a barrel. One reaction to the rise in oil prices was a rush toward biofuels. President Bush and Congress committed to slashing fossil fuel consumption 20% by 2017, in part by generating 35 billion gallons of alternative fuels. America jumped on the biofuel bandwagon, and within two years 25% of all U.S. grain crops were being used to produce ethanol.
Now comes the law of unintended consequences.
The diversion of grain to ethanol resulted in a grain shortage...and a corresponding spike in grain prices. This shortage has been further compounded by weather problems in grain producing countries like Russia, Australia, and the United States over the past few years which reduced the total harvest. Grain production dropped while an ever-higher percentage of the grain that was harvested was used to produce ethanol. And the result has been rising food prices.
We see the impact on our grocery bill as a minor irritation. But for those living in poverty in countries like Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, Jordan, Iran, or Syria these rising prices make life's basic necessities unaffordable.
And that leads to riots!
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Why Now?
One question has troubled me about the current unrest roiling the Middle East. Why now? Why did the current crisis erupt at this time? The answers being given by the media seem to be a mixture of a spontaneous desire for democracy coupled with rampant unemployment. While both are probably part of the equation, I suspect there are other factors as well. And one of these might be the rise in commodity prices--especially food.
Earlier this month, Bloomberg reported on a United States Department of Agriculture forecast that global wheat use will exceed production by 19.4 million tons. Similar deficits were also forecast for corn and soybeans. Other commodities, like sugar and cotton, have doubled in price over the past year. And during the last 12 months serious food price increases (and in some cases, food shortages) were reported in Algeria, Iran, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria.
Is a global food shortage on the way? And if so, what impact will it have on the countries of the Middle East? I think this is something we need to watch more closely in the coming months.
Earlier this month, Bloomberg reported on a United States Department of Agriculture forecast that global wheat use will exceed production by 19.4 million tons. Similar deficits were also forecast for corn and soybeans. Other commodities, like sugar and cotton, have doubled in price over the past year. And during the last 12 months serious food price increases (and in some cases, food shortages) were reported in Algeria, Iran, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria.
Is a global food shortage on the way? And if so, what impact will it have on the countries of the Middle East? I think this is something we need to watch more closely in the coming months.
Monday, December 6, 2010
Wikileaks and the Middle East, Part 2
As the WikiLeaks drama continues to unfold, it's starting to become yesterday's news. That is, much of the more recent material is similar to what has already been leaked. Once the shock value of the first documents wore off, these additional revelations are receiving less coverage. And perhaps that's a good thing.
However, I came across an analysis of WikiLeaks documents related to U.S. Middle East policy that I believe is worth reading. The article highlights the flawed assumptions behind the current U.S. policy of "engagement" in the Middle East--a policy that assumes it's in our long-term interest to engage former enemies like Iran and Syria and to pressure Israel to resolve the Israeli/Palestinian problem, which is supposedly the root cause for most turmoil in the Middle East.
The article, "Wikileaks reveal flaw in US Middle East policy," shows the fallacy behind our current policy. As the documents demonstrate, many of the countries in the Middle East believe the root problem is not the Israeli/Palestinian crisis, it's Iran and her commitment to export Islamic fundamentalism. I'll cite one example from the article to illustrate this point. The article quotes cable detailing a meeting between Saudi King Abdullah and White House adviser John Brennan. The cable quotes King Abdullah's response to a suggestion that a solution to the Arab/Israeli conflict would help diffuse problems in the Middle East. “A solution to the Arab/Israeli conflict would be a great achievement, but Iran would find other ways to cause trouble.”
King Abdullah sees Iran, not Israel, as the real source of trouble in the Middle East. The article also quotes other cables from leaders like Egyptian President Mubarak in which these leaders try to help the U.S. understand Middle East "facts of life." They believe the real "neighborhood bully" is Iran, not Israel. And they wish the local cop on the beat (the United States) would do something about the bully before it's too late.
However, I came across an analysis of WikiLeaks documents related to U.S. Middle East policy that I believe is worth reading. The article highlights the flawed assumptions behind the current U.S. policy of "engagement" in the Middle East--a policy that assumes it's in our long-term interest to engage former enemies like Iran and Syria and to pressure Israel to resolve the Israeli/Palestinian problem, which is supposedly the root cause for most turmoil in the Middle East.
The article, "Wikileaks reveal flaw in US Middle East policy," shows the fallacy behind our current policy. As the documents demonstrate, many of the countries in the Middle East believe the root problem is not the Israeli/Palestinian crisis, it's Iran and her commitment to export Islamic fundamentalism. I'll cite one example from the article to illustrate this point. The article quotes cable detailing a meeting between Saudi King Abdullah and White House adviser John Brennan. The cable quotes King Abdullah's response to a suggestion that a solution to the Arab/Israeli conflict would help diffuse problems in the Middle East. “A solution to the Arab/Israeli conflict would be a great achievement, but Iran would find other ways to cause trouble.”
King Abdullah sees Iran, not Israel, as the real source of trouble in the Middle East. The article also quotes other cables from leaders like Egyptian President Mubarak in which these leaders try to help the U.S. understand Middle East "facts of life." They believe the real "neighborhood bully" is Iran, not Israel. And they wish the local cop on the beat (the United States) would do something about the bully before it's too late.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
WikiLeaks and the Middle East
The release of thousands of documents by WikiLeaks has dealt a blow to U.S. prestige and influence in the world. Leaders of other nations will be far more careful in what they say to U.S. diplomats if they believe their private conversations might someday become public.
If there is any silver lining in this diplomatic cloud, it comes through the insight we have gained into the world of diplomacy. A tiny curtain was pulled back and we were given acces to the private conversations of world leaders. Most of the information was not new, or unexpected. Some was already known through earlier leaks to the press by "unnamed government sources" and "senior government officials." The WikiLeaks documents simply unmasked those who were the original sources for that information. And now, having been burned, they will be far more guarded in the future.
Is there anything of significance in the documents relating to Israel and the Middle East? Some items have emerged, though most are not surprises.
1. The major concern among America's Arab allies in the Middle East is Iran, not Israel, especially Iran's nuclear program.
2. Over three years ago Benjamin Netanyahu predicted that the acid test for determining how serious the Palestinians were about peace would be their willingness to accept a Jewish state without demanding a right of return for Palestinians.
3. The West failed the Palestinians when it helped fund a corrupt, bloated bureaucracy rather than working to build a healthy economy.
4. Israel tried to coordinate the Gaza war with both Egypt and the Palestinian Authority--to have them take control of Gaza after Israel smashed Hamas--but both refused.
I'm sure more items will surface as people pour through the documents, but these are some of the major points that have surfaced so far.
If there is any silver lining in this diplomatic cloud, it comes through the insight we have gained into the world of diplomacy. A tiny curtain was pulled back and we were given acces to the private conversations of world leaders. Most of the information was not new, or unexpected. Some was already known through earlier leaks to the press by "unnamed government sources" and "senior government officials." The WikiLeaks documents simply unmasked those who were the original sources for that information. And now, having been burned, they will be far more guarded in the future.
Is there anything of significance in the documents relating to Israel and the Middle East? Some items have emerged, though most are not surprises.
1. The major concern among America's Arab allies in the Middle East is Iran, not Israel, especially Iran's nuclear program.
2. Over three years ago Benjamin Netanyahu predicted that the acid test for determining how serious the Palestinians were about peace would be their willingness to accept a Jewish state without demanding a right of return for Palestinians.
3. The West failed the Palestinians when it helped fund a corrupt, bloated bureaucracy rather than working to build a healthy economy.
4. Israel tried to coordinate the Gaza war with both Egypt and the Palestinian Authority--to have them take control of Gaza after Israel smashed Hamas--but both refused.
I'm sure more items will surface as people pour through the documents, but these are some of the major points that have surfaced so far.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Ted Koppel and News as Entertainment
I appreciated Ted Koppel and Nightline, though we occupied opposite ends of the theological and political spectrum. He was committed to journalistic integrity, and I appreciated that commitment. He wrote an article in last Sunday's edition of The Washington Post that I found very insightful. It focused on the "death of real news" and the decline in television journalism from the bygone days "when the networks considered the collection and dissemination of substantive and unbiased news to be a public trust."
Koppel was referring to television news in general, but his article has direct application to news from the Middle East. This is a region where it's difficult to sift through all the bias and propaganda to find the real truth behind an issue. It takes time and effort to ferret out all the facts. Sadly, budgets, deadlines, and audience ratings are the enemies of such reporting. It's relatively easy (and more cost-efficient...and entertaining!) to present a compelling personal story as if it represents the whole truth. One of the most dramatic examples of this type of reporting--and the impact it can have--was the September 2000 story of 12-year-old Muhammad Al-Dura being "shot by Israeli soldiers." The story, with its graphic images, helped fuel the Al-Aqsa Intifada. While the accuracy of the story itself was eventually challenged, the facts that came to light were barely reported by the same news organizations that had carried the original story. Truth, it turns out, was just yesterday's news.
A second example took place in 2007 when a portion of an earth ramp leading to the Mugrabi Gate at the Temple Mount collapsed. Israel built a new access ramp, but they also used the opportunity to excavate the area that had collapsed. Anyone visiting Jerusalem could see that the excavation (done in plain site) was at least a hundred feet outside the Temple Mount area. But the Muslim religious authorities incited riots with claims that the Jews were undermining the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and many media outlets "accurately" reported the false claims, without bothering to mention the fact that the claims were unfounded! For a good summary of the event, click here.
Koppel ends his article with a bleak assessment of the current state of news reporting in the media. "The transition of news from a public service to a profitable commodity is irreversible. Legions of new media present a vista of unrelenting competition. Advertisers crave young viewers, and these young viewers are deemed to be uninterested in hard news, especially hard news from abroad. This is felicitous, since covering overseas news is very expensive. On the other hand, the appetite for strongly held, if unsubstantiated, opinion is demonstrably high. And such talk, as they say, is cheap."
So what's the lesson to be learned? I see two. First, the phrase caveat emptor--buyer beware--must now be applied to the news. Networks are peddling news as a commodity, and you need to be aware of that fact. You can't assume what you are watching, hearing, or reading has been carefully and meticulously checked for accuracy. They may accurately report what is said, but they don't necessarily check to see if what is being said is true. And so you must do so yourself.
Second, we need speak with louder voices to demand both accuracy and truthfulness from the media. Such reporting can help us see through the distortions of propaganda to understand the reality of what is happening in the world. I don't want to be entertained by the news, I want to be enlightened by it. And that requires a dedication to accuracy and honesty in reporting on the part of the media. What can you do? Call, write, or e-mail media outlets and let them know your expectations. If media executives see news from an economic perspective, reward those committed to journalistic integrity...and stop supporting those that do not!
Koppel was referring to television news in general, but his article has direct application to news from the Middle East. This is a region where it's difficult to sift through all the bias and propaganda to find the real truth behind an issue. It takes time and effort to ferret out all the facts. Sadly, budgets, deadlines, and audience ratings are the enemies of such reporting. It's relatively easy (and more cost-efficient...and entertaining!) to present a compelling personal story as if it represents the whole truth. One of the most dramatic examples of this type of reporting--and the impact it can have--was the September 2000 story of 12-year-old Muhammad Al-Dura being "shot by Israeli soldiers." The story, with its graphic images, helped fuel the Al-Aqsa Intifada. While the accuracy of the story itself was eventually challenged, the facts that came to light were barely reported by the same news organizations that had carried the original story. Truth, it turns out, was just yesterday's news.
A second example took place in 2007 when a portion of an earth ramp leading to the Mugrabi Gate at the Temple Mount collapsed. Israel built a new access ramp, but they also used the opportunity to excavate the area that had collapsed. Anyone visiting Jerusalem could see that the excavation (done in plain site) was at least a hundred feet outside the Temple Mount area. But the Muslim religious authorities incited riots with claims that the Jews were undermining the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and many media outlets "accurately" reported the false claims, without bothering to mention the fact that the claims were unfounded! For a good summary of the event, click here.
Koppel ends his article with a bleak assessment of the current state of news reporting in the media. "The transition of news from a public service to a profitable commodity is irreversible. Legions of new media present a vista of unrelenting competition. Advertisers crave young viewers, and these young viewers are deemed to be uninterested in hard news, especially hard news from abroad. This is felicitous, since covering overseas news is very expensive. On the other hand, the appetite for strongly held, if unsubstantiated, opinion is demonstrably high. And such talk, as they say, is cheap."
So what's the lesson to be learned? I see two. First, the phrase caveat emptor--buyer beware--must now be applied to the news. Networks are peddling news as a commodity, and you need to be aware of that fact. You can't assume what you are watching, hearing, or reading has been carefully and meticulously checked for accuracy. They may accurately report what is said, but they don't necessarily check to see if what is being said is true. And so you must do so yourself.
Second, we need speak with louder voices to demand both accuracy and truthfulness from the media. Such reporting can help us see through the distortions of propaganda to understand the reality of what is happening in the world. I don't want to be entertained by the news, I want to be enlightened by it. And that requires a dedication to accuracy and honesty in reporting on the part of the media. What can you do? Call, write, or e-mail media outlets and let them know your expectations. If media executives see news from an economic perspective, reward those committed to journalistic integrity...and stop supporting those that do not!
Friday, November 12, 2010
Inside the Middle East Crisis
In early October I had spoke at a strategic conference in Chicago. The event, sponsored by Chosen People Ministries, was entitled "Inside the Middle East Crisis"and also featured Joel Rosenberg, Erwin Lutzer, Michael Rydelnik, and Mitch Glaser, among others. Each speaker focused on the spiritual challenges facing the Middle East, and the impact those challenges will have on the rest of the world.
I just received word that audio and video from the conference is now available online. If would like to view the messages, click here to link to the site. And the best news of all is that access to the conference messages is free!
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Digging out the truth
One of the first victims in the current Middle East conflict has been truth. It takes time to sort through all the competing rhetoric to provide balanced, fair reporting. The incessant demands of a 24-hour news cycle--and the blending of news and entertainment--have resulted in news reports that are often more propaganda than factual reporting. This is true through all aspects of the media, but it seems to be more common in stories focused on events in the Middle East.
Where can one go to dig beneath the surface and discover the truth?
One of the best online sources I know is CAMERA--Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America. This site researches claims made in various media reports and digs beneath the surface to provide specific factual data on biased reporting, biased reporters, and biased sources. This level of research takes time, so some items have become "old news" by the time CAMERA finally issues a report. Still, I find their content very compelling. And they provide sources and links, which adds a level of transparency that is sadly lacking in many other media reports.
Want to read an example of their work? Look at their report on the anti-Israel article that appeared in the Julliard Journal...and follow the different links to track the level of research they have done to support their conclusions.
This is a site you ought to bookmark and visit on a regular basis. Truth is still the best defense against error!
Where can one go to dig beneath the surface and discover the truth?
One of the best online sources I know is CAMERA--Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America. This site researches claims made in various media reports and digs beneath the surface to provide specific factual data on biased reporting, biased reporters, and biased sources. This level of research takes time, so some items have become "old news" by the time CAMERA finally issues a report. Still, I find their content very compelling. And they provide sources and links, which adds a level of transparency that is sadly lacking in many other media reports.
Want to read an example of their work? Look at their report on the anti-Israel article that appeared in the Julliard Journal...and follow the different links to track the level of research they have done to support their conclusions.
This is a site you ought to bookmark and visit on a regular basis. Truth is still the best defense against error!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)