Zygmunt Bauman, one of the most influential thinkers of our time, says many Europeans' fear of refugees boils down to the idea of the “precariat” - people whose lives are marked by precariousness, anxiety and fear.
16 October 2016
Politico: It’s time to release the real history of the 1953 Iran coup
Sixty-three years ago, the CIA and British intelligence fomented a coup d’état that toppled the prime minister of Iran, restored a cooperative shah and strengthened a regional buffer against possible Soviet aggression. It also unwittingly set Iran on a course toward dictatorship and helped inject the 1979 Iranian revolution with an anti-American cast that continues to animate hardline elements within the current regime. [...]
Numerous excuses for refusing to publish documentation on the Iran coup have surfaced over the years. A standard rationale invoked by the intelligence community on a wide range of subjects has been the need to safeguard “sources and methods.” Protecting individuals from harm is praiseworthy, though arguably less meaningful in cases such as this when every major participant is deceased. Protecting methods is also perfectly reasonable in theory, but CIA claims deserve some scrutiny when the agency has used similar assertions to keep World War I-era techniques like the use of invisible ink classified until almost a century later — far beyond the method’s usefulness. [...]
Instead of holding onto the past, the State Department has an opportunity here. The consensus of Iran experts I have spoken with in recent weeks is this: Why not deny hardliners once and for all the benefits they’ve been reaping from this propaganda gift? Claim the high road by throwing open the available record even on our most awkward episodes. Identify this for what it is — a gesture of respect to the Iranian people — and call on Tehran to act in kind by acknowledging that both sides have historical reasons to claim grievances against the other.
Looking beyond Iran, releasing the FRUS volume would contribute to other worthwhile goals. It would give a boost to the president’s lofty commitment to greater openness, a part of his record that has come under fire from his supporters in recent years. More importantly, it would at last provide the American people access to a chapter of their recent history they have every right to see. It would even strike a blow for the currently unfashionable principle of judging our past — and our elected officials — on the basis of historical fact rather than self-serving partisan invention.
Independent: Israeli human rights group urges UN to take action to end country's 'brutal' occupation of Palestine
An Israeli human rights group urged the UN Security Council to take decisive action now to end the country's occupation of Palestinian territory.
Hagai El-Ad, executive director of B'Tselem, told an informal council meeting Friday on "Illegal Israeli Settlements: Obstacles to Peace and the Two-State Solution" that Israel has controlled Palestinian lives in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem for the past 49 years "and counting."
"Israel will not cease being an oppressor simply by waking up one day and realising the brutality of its policies," he said.
With the 50th anniversary approaching next year, El-Ad said "the rights of Palestinians must be realised, the occupation must end, the UN Security Council must act, and the time is now." [...]
Another Israeli rights group, Peace Now, was invited to speak but it was represented by its sister organization, Americans for Peace Now, which has also campaigned for an end to Israeli occupation.
"The occupation is a threat to Israel's security and to Israel's very existence," said Lara Friedman, the group's director of policy and government relations. [...]
The Palestinians pushed for the Security Council to adopt a resolution against settlements in February 2011 but it was vetoed by the United States. The 14 other Security Council members voted in favour of the resolution, reflecting the wide support for the draft which had over 100 co-sponsors.
The Huffington Post: How Hungary and Poland have silenced women and stifled human rights
The popular view voiced by the Polish opposition - that the governing Law and Justice Party (PiS) wants to bring back the Middle Ages - is insufficient. It relies on the “backlash” narrative of women’s emancipation, which sees nations making linear progress towards equality, interrupted by setbacks that can be overcome by joint action. [...]
The emergent regimes of Viktor Orbán in Hungary and Beata Szydło in Poland do not represent a revival of authoritarianism, but a new form of governance. This new system stems from the failures of globalisation and neoliberalism, which created states that are weak for the strong, and strong for the weak.
To describe the modus operandi of these new regimes, we have coined a new term: the “polypore” state.
A polypore is a parasitic fungus that feeds on rotting trees, contributing to their decay.
In the same way, the governments of Poland and Hungary feed on the vital resources of their liberal predecessors, and produce a fully dependent state structure in return.
This style of government involves appropriating the institutions, mechanisms and funding channels of the European liberal democratic project. [...]
Just as the polypore fungus usually attacks already damaged trees, illiberal regimes rise to power in the context of democratic standards weakened by the financial, security and migration crises.
In Central Europe, post-1989 regime transformation gave preference to economic reform measures over civic and social ones. Liberal norms and practices have never been fully embedded in these societies. This creates a paradoxical situation where illiberal forces have flourished amid an unfinished liberal revolution.
The Telegraph: Controversy as Russian town unveils first statue of Ivan the Terrible
He was Russia’s first Tsar, a military leader and visionary who set the county on the path to superpower status, introduced the printing press, and even established Moscow’s first contacts with England.
He was also of the most feared tyrants in history, a mentally disturbed paranoiac who unleashing a reign of terror that devastated whole cities and suffered bouts of madness that even saw him kill his own son.
More than four centuries after his death, Ivan the Terrible was again at the centre of controversy after Russia’s first ever statue to the notorious 16th century ruler was unveiled on Monday. [...]
The statue has also been backed by Vladimir Medinsky, Russia’s culture minister, who has argued that Ivan’s ruthlessness was comparable with that of his European contemporaries.
He acknowledged in a speech that Ivan was “one of the most controversial” figures in Russian history.
Others have been outraged at the idea of erecting a monument to the ruler, however.
Critics launched a court battle to try to block the project, and more than 500 people signed a local petition that said "We don't need a monument to a tyrant in the city."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)