|
| January 17, 2009 | Saturday | Muharram 19, 1430 |
Fiddling as Gaza burns
All hands on deck?
OTHER VOICES - Sri Lankan Press
Europe divided over Gaza
Future of web news
THE European Union’s failure to mediate a Middle East truce or clinch a long-term settlement of the energy dispute between Russia and Ukraine have meant a difficult and embarrassing start to the new year for the 27-nation bloc.
IT must be the future — the most feted, most dynamically charged news website of the lot. Eight million unique users, a 448 per cent annual growth rate and awards showering down. Want to raise another $25m, even in these straitened times? Certainly, madam. Venture capitalists duly oblige.
THERE are several ways to interpret the latest actions against the Jamaatud Dawa. A sceptical interpretation would emphasise the severe diplomatic pressure Pakistan has been under in recent days and take note of the fact that the Saudi intelligence chief was in Pakistan the day before the details of the post-Mumbai crackdown were made public. From this point of view, the pressure on the Jamaatud Dawa is not serious or long-term and will abate once the world’s attention is diverted. The more positive interpretation would be that forging a consensus in the Pakistani state apparatus to go after militant networks is a delicate process and that now, finally, some eight weeks since the Mumbai attacks, everyone is on the same page and the mission is to shut down militant networks in Pakistan once and for all. The events of the days ahead will make it clear whether it is the former or the latter interpretation which is true — or, indeed, if the truth is somewhere in between. In the best-case scenario, Pakistan will shut down all visible signs of militant networks; cut off their sources of funding; and arrest and prosecute militant leaders.
More difficult, especially for India, will be to exercise the patience to wait and see if Pakistan is sincere in its fight against terrorists operating from its soil. In recent days there has been a concerted campaign across the border to step up the rhetoric against Pakistan. This is unfortunate, though perhaps not hard to explain. No doubt some in New Delhi, and in other capitals, will look at Thursday’s announcement of the sweep against the Jamaatud Dawa and wonder why those actions were not announced immediately after the UN added the organisation and some of its leaders to a terrorist watch list. Yet, New Delhi’s sometimes harsh tone has been part of the problem. It is very difficult for a government on either side of the border to appear to be caving in to pressure from the other, so whenever inflammatory rhetoric emanates from India, Pakistan is likely to baulk at doing what is in the interest of everyone in the region.
By the same token, the Pakistan state must understand that going soft on terror, the perceived status quo, is no longer acceptable. It need look no further than Saudi Arabia to know in which direction the wind is blowing internationally. The Saudi government is believed to have sent a clear message to Pakistan: Mumbai-style attacks are unacceptable and Pakistan needs to move firmly against militant groups. The folly of a Faustian bargain with militants — whereby they are left alone if they do not attack the state in which they reside — is now clear to everyone. Pakistan has never benefited from the jihadi groups and never will. It is time the state accepts that reality.
AS though slaughtering scores of men, women and children on a daily basis were not enough, Israeli forces are now ruthlessly directing their offensive at Gaza’s future as well. Nearly 1,100 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli bombing in the three weeks since the present round of conflict began. Now the invading Israeli army is targeting infrastructure and facilities that have provided some relief to Gaza’s besieged people. On Thursday Israel shelled the UN headquarters supplying thousands of pounds of food and humanitarian aid to the Palestinians. This is a crime that has evoked a hail of condemnation from international quarters because the world body has become a victim. Its implications are grave. It demonstrates Israel’s contempt for the international organisation that alone holds some hope for the traumatised population of Gaza. While world leaders fiddle as Gaza burns, more attention needs to be paid to what UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has termed a “dire humanitarian crisis” that has reached an “unbearable point”.
The world has still to focus on the people — especially the children — of Gaza. Israel’s ever-tightening 18-month blockade on what it declared as “hostile territory” had already been taking a heavy toll when the shelling began on Dec 27. Now hospitals and schools are being hit. Power transmission has been interrupted and water is in short supply. With food stocks being decimated, hunger and starvation appear to be round the corner. How will all this affect the psyche of the Palestinian children trapped in this besieged area? If their future is at stake, also at risk is the future of peace in the Middle East. Can children who have witnessed the trauma of the last three weeks in Gaza ever grow up to be peace-loving citizens and strive for a tolerant, conflict-free society?
It is time for the peace brokers to respond immediately to Gaza’s tragedy. The need of the hour is for western powers perceived as friends of Israel to get the latter to rein in its bellicosity and to exercise restraint. Israel’s strategy of excessive retaliation to Hamas’s pinpricks — 1,100 Palestinian deaths as against 13 Israelis at the last count — has not helped it achieve its war goals. It has only worsened the crisis. The Arab world’s reaction, while vociferous, has not been adequate in practical terms either. Should not Cairo, that plays the interlocutor seeking for a way out of the impasse, also consider opening the Rafah crossing to allow relief to flow to the Gazans?
ARRIVING at a consensus will be critical if the 17th Amendment is to be repealed. The changes sought by the major parties may differ but the bottom line is that the constitution cannot be amended without a two-thirds majority. As such it is necessary not to quibble and to instead focus on the one provision of the 17th Amendment that poses the greatest danger to the parliamentary form of government: to wit, Gen Musharraf’s resurrection of Article 58-2(b). True, some other provisions of the 17th Amendment are less than savoury, such as the legal cover given to Musharraf’s actions since 1999. But to become obsessed with the sins of a man who is no longer relevant, or to seek redress for the personal grievances of those he overthrew, is tantamount to missing the point altogether. Then there is the fact that there are certain positive aspects of the 17th Amendment, such as the restoration of the joint electorate and a significant increase in reserved seats for women, that ought not to be discarded in the housekeeping exercise. This is the time to look forward, not ponder on the past. All those who want democracy to prosper need to zero in on relegating Article 58-2(b) to the dustbin of history. The power to appoint the services chiefs must also revert to the prime minister.
On Thursday, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani rightly stressed the need for a consensus bill vis-à-vis the 17th Amendment. His party will have a hard time, however, convincing other players that the PPP is genuinely on board. For one thing, why hasn’t the ruling party taken the lead in repealing the 17th Amendment since it came to power? If the PPP believes in the supremacy of parliament, why does the presidency call the shots? What we have now, for all intents and purposes, is a presidential form of government. Consider too that the PPP has reneged on a number of promises since it came to power. The chief justice deposed by Gen Musharraf was not restored, the concurrent list has not been abolished and the death penalty is still on the books. The nation expects honesty of purpose.
Low level of election violence
Daily Mirror
AMID disconcerting news that the people of this country are constantly treated to these days comes the encouraging report of the leading election monitoring organisation PAFFREL that election violence in ... two provinces remains at an all-time low. Presenting its first interim report on the ongoing Central and North Western provinces’ election campaign conducted by political parties in the fray, its head Kingsley Rodrigo says that only five instances of election-related violence have been reported within the two weeks following the closing of nominations.
PAFFREL executive director cites the voters’ lack of interest in these prematurely declared elections as one of the reasons for reduced instances of violence. He nevertheless anticipates a change in the situation as the day of elections draws closer. It is indeed the wish of all peace-loving people of this country that the present state of peace and tranquillity will be maintained throughout enabling the conduct of a free and fair election. It is the duty of all concerned to lend their maximum support and cooperation in achieving this objective.
The major part of the responsibility rests on the politicians and political parties. All political parties, of course, declare their commitment to conducting a free and fair election devoid of violence and malpractices. But their actions, more often than not, run counter to these commitments. The acrimonious comments they make and unfounded personal and political accusations they level against one another from political platforms cause anger, hatred and resentment. They often seem to get overwhelmed by their own verbal exuberance when they address their ardent and cheering party supporters. They throw to the winds the advice given even by Ven Mahanayake Theras to guard their tongues as they speak from political platforms.
Another feature that causes much conflict among parties is the political conversions that are regularly reported in the media. Most of these conversions seem to be unethical like much maligned religious conversions. Most of these party somersaults are the result of various inducements offered to the converted. Jobs, positions and other favours are freely offered to desert their parties. Among the converted are also persons sidelined by their original parties for their wrongdoing.
There are, of course, some who change parties through genuine political convictions. People have every right to shift their affiliations from one party to another and this right should not be interfered with. There could well be a fair percentage of genuine party deserters among the 5,000 UNP members in the Kandy District who, according to Minister Dallas Alahapperuma, are to join the UPFA on Sunday. This group, he says, includes 25 Pradeshiya Sabha members. It is hoped that this expected mass defection will not give rise to conflicts or clashes.
Obviously, the police in these provinces will have to play their role impartially and effectively in maintaining the present level of peace. It is their responsibility to enforce the law in close collaboration with the election commissioner who has issued instructions to ensure a free and fair election. — (Jan 16)
While Europe’s foreign policy shortcomings are not new, the disarray in European ranks as regards the Middle East is particularly galling at a time when the new US administration is expected to demand a stronger EU role in the region.
Policymakers in Brussels insist that the EU’s impotence as regards ending the Israel-Arab conflict or securing a long-term solution to chronic Russia-Ukraine tensions will be corrected once the bloc’s new treaty, which foresees the appointment of a first-ever foreign minister, is in force. But others argue that while the new treaty will help clear up some confusion on how the EU deals with the rest of the world — and the rest of the world deals with Europe — much will depend on the personality of the future foreign minister and the back-up he receives from European capitals and his own staff. The picture is not rosy for the moment. Disarray in EU ranks meant that as Israel multiplied its attacks on Gaza last week, the EU was struggling unsuccessfully to forge a united front on the issue. In the end, it was a question of too many cooks spoiling the broth, with several European ministers and parliamentarians vying for the spotlight as they arrived in the Middle East to lobby for peace.
At one stage, Israeli President Shimon Peres had an array of European interlocutors, including three EU foreign ministers, the EU external relations commissioner and the EU’s foreign policy chief. In addition, French President Nicolas Sarkozy — whose country handed over the EU presidency to the Czech Republic on Jan 1 — was in the area working on a high-profile solution to the conflict.
As the crisis continues, with over 1,000 Palestinians already dead, the often confused EU response has exposed the bloc’s difficulty in being taken seriously as a political heavyweight. This is especially true in the Middle East which many EU policymakers see as Europe’s backyard and where the Union has spent millions of euros over the years in development and humanitarian aid. Most Arab countries and Israel also have special trade relations with the EU, allowing their products tariff-free or reduced-duty entry into European markets. But try as they might, Europe has failed to make a serious political impact in the region.
One key reason is that Israel has consistently criticised Europe’s Middle East policy as being too pro-Palestinian. Seeking to improve relations with Israel, EU governments agreed last year to upgrade relations with the country. But those moves have now been put on ice because of EU anger at Israel’s breach of international humanitarian law in Gaza.
EU policymakers say they are hopeful that the expected entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty later this year will help salvage Europe’s credibility in foreign policy. The new set of rules foresees a permanent president of the European Council, instead of the current six-monthly rotation between the 27-member states ranging from tiny Malta and Luxembourg to heavyweights Germany, France and the UK. It also introduces an EU foreign minister, which supporters of the treaty say will put an end to the merry-go-round in foreign policy. However, the new treaty will only be an improvement. The job description of both the foreign minister and the EU president are clear-cut to avoid bickering between the two. Much will also depend on the personality of the top EU officials.
Many EU observers point out the discrepancy between the high-profile Sarkozy-led French presidency and the current Czech one and say it is imperative that the EU is led by politicians from big countries in order to be effective. This, in turn, has prompted suggestions that former British Prime Minister Tony Blair should be given the job of EU president and that the future foreign minister should also be a powerful and high-profile personality from a bigger EU state
EU policymakers are also watching carefully as thousands of Europeans — including Muslims — take to the streets daily to protest against the Israeli offensive in Gaza. In Spain, much to Israel’s anger, Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero participated in one of the demonstrations and called for an immediate ceasefire.
French President Sarkozy has warned that his country would not tolerate violence between Muslim and Jewish communities because of the ongoing conflict. The admonition came after a burning car was rammed into the gates of a synagogue in Toulouse late Monday evening. France has the EU’s largest Muslim and its largest Jewish communities, and tensions have risen since Israel’s military reaction to Hamas-sponsored rocket attacks began.
There is concern not only about the increase in violence between European Muslims and Jews but also fears that the war could further radicalise Muslims in Europe. “There is a feeling of helplessness, hopelessness and powerlessness among Britain’s Muslims in the context of Gaza, British Justice Minister Shahid Malik told Britain’s Guardian newspaper. “The sense of grievance and injustice is both profoundly acute and obviously profoundly unhealthy,” he added.
Meanwhile, EU relations with both Russia and Ukraine have taken a battering as the two countries lock horns over the delivery of gas to eastern and western Europe. The EU imports a fifth of its gas from Russia via Ukraine. The crisis has highlighted its vulnerability to disruption and sparked renewed debate about diversifying supplies.
European Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso has called the situation “unacceptable and incredible” and said the EU executive would advise the bloc’s firms to sue Russian and Ukrainian energy companies unless gas supplies were restored quickly. Both Moscow and Kiev seem to be betting, however, that at least for the moment, Europe’s bark is stronger than its bite.
The writer is Dawn’s correspondent in Brussels.
Your Huffington Post, just four years old, is already worth $100m. Here’s one sort of journalism that can shrug off recession, surely? Tina Brown with her ultra-competitive, somewhat derivative, Daily Beast is already turning a wheeze into a formula.
And that formula — from Arianna Huffington to Lady Harry Evans (aka Tina Brown) — seems suitably promising. No more tonnes of paper newspapers and heavy lorries; no more futile costs. Here’s the web standing proud and unencumbered, giving you the basic news you need in a neat, edited package that moves swiftly into blogged opinion. Huffington calls this her search for truth. Jaundiced readers of American newspapers would call it a long overdue reaction to too many po-faced balancing acts in monopoly papers afraid to express any opinion.
A TNS Media Intelligence analysis quoted in Advertising Age last week puts Huffington Post revenue between January and August last year at a mere $302,000 or so. It’s no secret that, at best, Huffington’s enterprise was only occasionally profitable, in an election year during which US liberals flocked to the site. The web news wunderkinds have just the same difficulty as boring old print: they can’t turn what they have into worthwhile money. And the deeper the recession goes, the worse their predicament will become.
Take a closer look at where the lifeblood news on which they comment comes from. Huffington Post provides a long source list, including an impressive roll call of bloggers, but the basic facts and developments come from 40-plus newspapers and broadcasting station newsrooms catalogued as providers (including the Guardian, Times and Independent in the UK). And there’s the rub.
The Huffington Post has about 50 staff, most of them technical and production hands. It would like more reporters of its own, of course, but (unlike Brown’s Beast) doesn’t attempt to pay its big bloggers a cent. Honour and glory stand in for a cheque. As the founder of the Guardian C.P. Scott never said (in schoolboy parody): Comment is free, but facts are expensive.
The medium-term weakness of all the bright new websites, in short, is that they need grist as well as glitz. But that basic commodity has to be jackdawed together day by day. They can’t afford to uncover it for themselves. They have to skate over the surface of commenting on other people’s work.
The death of the newspaper, as tremulously foretold? OK then, so where’s the beef? There ought to be plenty of room for accommodation along Huffington’s golden road into the future but she also needs to make money first. And the curse of the new is much like the curse of the old: have bright, fashionable product and huge audience. Now, will somebody please pay me a living wage?
— The Guardian, London
