Skip to main content

The Middle East List for 2009

It seems to have almost become a tradition for newspapers, journals and the media generally to run lists at the end of a calendar year of this or that.

FP [Foreign Policy] is no exception. It has published its Middle East List for 2009. "Interesting" people have made it - but most not surprisingly. They have certainly been instrumental in framing the "news" in the region.

Read the full article, here, but some examples:

"Fan Favorite: Neda Soltan and the Iranian Green Revolutionaries. They may not have won (at least not yet), but the courageous protests which swept Tehran after the fraudulent "victory" of Mahmoud Ahmedenejad captured the world's attention. Neda Soltan became the international symbol of the protests, a focal point for the brave and resourceful -- and seemingly largely uncoordinated -- efforts of thousands upon thousands of ordinary Iranians. It's too early to know whether they will become the Chicago Cubs of the Middle East (lovable losers who bring deep pain every year to their fans after raising their hopes) or the Boston Red Sox (who threw off a similar curse to finally win). But the game will never be the same."

And:

"Defensive Player of the Year: Benjamin Netanyahu. The Israeli Prime Minister's ability to stand up to the United States on the issue of settlements threw American Middle East policy into the trash bin, harmed Obama's credibility across the Middle East and throughout the world, and may have squandered Israel's last chance to achieve a lasting peace with the Palestinians and the Arab world. But he successfully defended his positions, won considerable support from the Israeli public, and for whatever reason paid little to no costs of any kind with the United States."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...