Ya Hiya al-Caida :: Something smarter than us is going to emerge


node:	Ya Hiya al-Caida
template:	3
parent:	Brotherhood of Nod es
owner:	al-caid
viewed by:
created:	19.12.2008 - 06:12:41
updated:	31.12.2008 - 10:58:24

cwbe coordinatez:
4684483
792056
4373367

ABSOLUT
KYBERIA

permissions
you:	r,
system:	public
net:	yes

andread

politics

04684483007920560437336704396929

The state of Israel, most exotic political scene of the world, is in these days bombarding the Gaza Strip. As always, there were two immediate reactions: supportive, calling to war against Hamas' rule of terror and stop their still rising destructive power and negative, pointing out the high death toll or at least intransparency in case of Israeli attacks. The operation is from an external view very dubious. Its propagated aim is similar as that of last campaign against Hizballah, to prevent rocket attacks against the Israeli territory, which were now rising since the end of "truce". Israeli forces are again trying to weaken their enemy without defining it; the attacks were commenced without a formal declaration of war, without parliamentary approval, even without any presence of media in the region.

The situation is paradox: both parties refuse to formally recognize each other's authority, but nevertheless they act so. Hamas, by bombarding Israeli settlements, tried to provoke the Israeli attack, expecting foreign support and diplomatic pressure on Israel (a standard strategy of medialized asymetric warfare, which failed, exactly like in the recent case of Georgia, but helped before in Kosovo). Israel, by isolating the Gaza Strip since Hamas took the power over the territory, only helped to radicalize the movement by eliminating any opposition (if it was Fatah- or Hamas-based), leaving there a single hard-line wing. The war is cruel, but it seems now that both parties wanted it, even if they would never say it really is a "war", what they do to each other. Hamas is in fact unable to lead an open war with Israelis, either in a guerilla strategy or merely by terrorist operations, as their rate of infiltration is way behind that of Arafat's times. Their only tool of operation is to incite the conflict, to irritate Israelis. For the Israel, they fight merely against this irritation, avoiding any solution in a form of an occupation (politically risky tool before the ongoing elections) or support of Fatah opposition (if there is any left).

Today's technology gives a tremendous destructive potential to any single person. Missiles assembled in house workshops may be fired hundred kilometres away and thus not only irritate and terrorize the enemy population, but even strike military targets, as the proper equipment becomes smaller and easier to obtain. Thus the war becomes more dynamic and personal, easily caused by a small number of an organized Hamas command; which needs an appropriate speed of Olmert's government reaction. Democratic mechanisms, which are to prevent the terrible costs and abuse of military operations, become an obstacle and I can only expect their gradual diminishing. They aren't part of "wars", but rather of electoral propaganda on the one side and of gaining the foreign contacts on the other.

04684483007920560437336704373069

This week brought us two moments, which made even me, a Slovak living far off both occurences, surprised. One happened during the perhaps last Bush's visit of Iraq, which would be usually forgotten in a day or two if Muntazer al-Zaidi wouldn't send him his shoes. This arose double feelings: al-Zaidi became a local celebrity afterwards, but Bush, by his true cowboy reaction, received an attention as if he was regaining some his popularity again as well. Some were eager to make of al-Zaidi a hero, or even a martyr, others, on the other hand, let themselves fascinated by Bush's cold head, which should have abashed the attacker himself. A cynic would say that Bush was lucky to be attacked, for only now he can say he won the war. That means, he doesn't have to care about it any more.

The second highlight was the Greek wave of student protests, which weren't that attractive as the fact the president had to dodge flying shoes, but in fact tried to consciously (unlike Zaidi's popularity) make a local problem a global one. It was a standard scheme of escalation. A right-wing government proposes economic reforms and these are questioned by those, who immediately lose by them. Presented unquestionable need of these reforms - which in context of the World Financial Crisis meme are really inseparable from any (not only rightist) actual government policy - had been met with insufficient discussion, amassing frustration. Then Alexis-Andreas Grigoropoulos had been shot and then no arguments were needed. Police could have been in right, could have committed a crime, it could have been an accident...nothing changes the fact the boy died and that people dislike it, when their friends die by hands of those, who should protect them. Consequent emotive escalation was, however, met by minimal resistance. Government, who failed to discuss the reforms with those wounded by them, didn't fail to prevent deaths of other of their opponents. Although they showed no strength, they showed the same cold head as Bush, leaving the riots for "extremists" and "anarchists".

These surprises were both of the same nature: strong images of a dodging president and riots in the cradle of democracy, bound with a chain of analyses in media, which in fact killed the emotion, which could have been aroused by them. Both al-Zaidi and Grigoropoulos aroused powerful emotions, which are surprisingly quickly weakening. Iraqi politics continue with good relations with USA, Greek protests didn't arouse the expected reaction in other countries - including Slovakia - where the particular problems (like commercionalizing of education) are present in the same form. One would ask, how could the Romans overthrow their king because of one raped girl? Why is it better to let conflicts escalate and then let time (accelerated by global media) heal them? The will, expressed in both critical moment and immediate reactions, was inconsequent; it cannot face the reason, which can calculate when the emotion fades, which knows, when is the right time to ask without receiving a negative answer.

axone blogs