In light of recent claims of killing Awlaki by the US government, here is a very interesting interview of al-Awlaki by Aljazeera dated about a year and a half ago:
Interview: Anwar al-Awlaki - Focus - Al Jazeera English
Friday, September 30, 2011
Thursday, September 29, 2011
"How the State Department Came After Me"
Here is a very interesting case that is developing between a current member of the State Department and his freedom to criticize his own organization.
Peter Van Buren spent some time in Iraq and subsequently wrote a piece criticizing some of the ridiculous expenditures, but more importantly, fundamental failures of post-war Iraq "reconstruction." His story was published in Foreign Policy, read here.
Then some controversy ensued, and you can read about Van Buren's response here. It essentially boils down to the State Department's hypocracy in criticizing foreign governments for censoring media while the Department engages in the same practices at home, including intimidating its own employees, threatening them, and stifling innocuous speech just to save some face.
I included, in my opinion, the most eloquent passages from the article below:
"We have been battered to death with public statements from the Secretary of State on down demanding the rights of bloggers and journalists in China, Burma and the Middle East be respected. While the State Department does not lock its naughty bloggers in basement prison cells, it does purposefully, willfully, and in an organized way seek to chill the responsible exercise of free speech by its employees. It does this selectively; blogs that promote an on-message theme are left alone (or even linked to by the Department) while blogs that say things that are troublesome or offensive to the Department are bullied out of existence. This is not consistent with the values the State Department seeks to promote abroad. It is not the best of us, and it undermines our message and our mission in every country where we work where people can still read this.
I have a job now at State that has nothing to do with Iraq, something I enjoy and something I am competent at. To me, there is no conflict here. I'd like to keep my job if I can, and in the meantime, I'll continue to write. I have no need to resign in protest, as I don't think I've done anything wrong absent throwing a few pies at some clowns and bringing to daylight a story that needed to be told, albeit at the cost of some embarrassment to the Department of State. That seems to me compatible with my oath of office, as well as my obligations as a citizen. I hope State comes to agree with me. After all, State asks the same thing of governments abroad, right?"
Peter Van Buren spent some time in Iraq and subsequently wrote a piece criticizing some of the ridiculous expenditures, but more importantly, fundamental failures of post-war Iraq "reconstruction." His story was published in Foreign Policy, read here.
Then some controversy ensued, and you can read about Van Buren's response here. It essentially boils down to the State Department's hypocracy in criticizing foreign governments for censoring media while the Department engages in the same practices at home, including intimidating its own employees, threatening them, and stifling innocuous speech just to save some face.
I included, in my opinion, the most eloquent passages from the article below:
"We have been battered to death with public statements from the Secretary of State on down demanding the rights of bloggers and journalists in China, Burma and the Middle East be respected. While the State Department does not lock its naughty bloggers in basement prison cells, it does purposefully, willfully, and in an organized way seek to chill the responsible exercise of free speech by its employees. It does this selectively; blogs that promote an on-message theme are left alone (or even linked to by the Department) while blogs that say things that are troublesome or offensive to the Department are bullied out of existence. This is not consistent with the values the State Department seeks to promote abroad. It is not the best of us, and it undermines our message and our mission in every country where we work where people can still read this.
I have a job now at State that has nothing to do with Iraq, something I enjoy and something I am competent at. To me, there is no conflict here. I'd like to keep my job if I can, and in the meantime, I'll continue to write. I have no need to resign in protest, as I don't think I've done anything wrong absent throwing a few pies at some clowns and bringing to daylight a story that needed to be told, albeit at the cost of some embarrassment to the Department of State. That seems to me compatible with my oath of office, as well as my obligations as a citizen. I hope State comes to agree with me. After all, State asks the same thing of governments abroad, right?"
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
اولین پست به فارسی!
به هدف این که نویسندگی فارسی ام را بهتر کنم، قصد دارم بعضی از پستهایم را در فارسی منتشر کنم. در خواست میکنم که دوستان فارسی زبان نوشتارم (یا 'نویسندگی ام؟' -- فرقش چی هست راستی؟) را حتما ویرایش و انتقاد کنن. متاسفانه تا حالا نتونستم نوشتارم را زیاد تمرین کنم و خیلی خوشحال میشم اگر تواناییم در فارسی افزایش پیدا کنه .
دوتا از مشکلهای اصلی که دارم این است که (۱) وقتی فارسی مینویسم تو ذهنم گرامر انگلیسی دارم استفاده میکنم، و (۲) لغتها و جملاتی که استفاده میکنم عامی هستن.
!اگر خوانندگان وبلاگم هیچ پیشنادی داراند، خیلی خوشحال میشم
دوتا از مشکلهای اصلی که دارم این است که (۱) وقتی فارسی مینویسم تو ذهنم گرامر انگلیسی دارم استفاده میکنم، و (۲) لغتها و جملاتی که استفاده میکنم عامی هستن.
!اگر خوانندگان وبلاگم هیچ پیشنادی داراند، خیلی خوشحال میشم
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Geopolitical Journey: Iran at a Crossroads
Geopolitical Journey: Iran at a Crossroads
This is a good article to read about an analyst's recent trip to Iran. I agree with most , if not all of what he says about domestic Iranian politics -- mainly that the Islamic Republic has massive popular and elite support and that the Green Movement has always been a constrained force.
He also makes a very interesting point that the region is undergoing a political awakening -- not a religious revival -- and that the uprisings have been limited to the Arab world, thus the term "Islamic Awakening" (thus extending to non-Arab nations as well) may not be apt. This is a quite interesting point and one I would definitely like to engage further in future posts.
The question, at the heart of the matter, is what is motivating these events? Islam, at least nominally, was at the forefront of revolutions and uprisings in the Middle East from the middle to late 20th century including the Islamic Revolution in Iran and Muslim Brotherhood movements in countries such as Egypt, Syria and Turkey.
In light of this, we should ponder Asef Bayat's assertions on "Post-Islamism" and how, as he argues, the current "theme" of Muslim societies has turned away from "Islamic fundamentalism" to focusing on better government and lively civil society. Bayat published his book in 2007, but it seems to be extremely relevant today. Are we in a "post-Islamist" world, and what does that mean? What has taken the place of Islamic revivalism?
This is a good article to read about an analyst's recent trip to Iran. I agree with most , if not all of what he says about domestic Iranian politics -- mainly that the Islamic Republic has massive popular and elite support and that the Green Movement has always been a constrained force.
He also makes a very interesting point that the region is undergoing a political awakening -- not a religious revival -- and that the uprisings have been limited to the Arab world, thus the term "Islamic Awakening" (thus extending to non-Arab nations as well) may not be apt. This is a quite interesting point and one I would definitely like to engage further in future posts.
The question, at the heart of the matter, is what is motivating these events? Islam, at least nominally, was at the forefront of revolutions and uprisings in the Middle East from the middle to late 20th century including the Islamic Revolution in Iran and Muslim Brotherhood movements in countries such as Egypt, Syria and Turkey.
In light of this, we should ponder Asef Bayat's assertions on "Post-Islamism" and how, as he argues, the current "theme" of Muslim societies has turned away from "Islamic fundamentalism" to focusing on better government and lively civil society. Bayat published his book in 2007, but it seems to be extremely relevant today. Are we in a "post-Islamist" world, and what does that mean? What has taken the place of Islamic revivalism?
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Ahmadinejad Coverage
Compare these two stories published on Ahmadinejad's latest UN speech:
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/200679.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44627475/ns/world_news/?ocid=ansmsnbc11
The first is published by Press TV, an Iranian government funded news organization, and the second (which includes a video of Ahmadinejad's speech) by MSNBC, an American corporate news organization.
Same speech, completely different framing by the news organizations. Anyone care to point out the differences? Feel free to comment.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/200679.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44627475/ns/world_news/?ocid=ansmsnbc11
The first is published by Press TV, an Iranian government funded news organization, and the second (which includes a video of Ahmadinejad's speech) by MSNBC, an American corporate news organization.
Same speech, completely different framing by the news organizations. Anyone care to point out the differences? Feel free to comment.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Internal Dynamics
Stratfor has recently published two publicly accessible analyses which intelligently reflect how internal politics affects a country's foreign policy.
The first article is an excellent piece on how the Obama administration has come up short in the domestic politics game and how Obama is stuck between trying to solidify his base and capturing centrists. Essentially, the article states that Obama will be deeply focusing on domestic affairs for at least up until the next election and will be unable to undertake serious foreign policy initiatives as that would take away focus from re-election.
The second analysis, a video, discusses the unique role Ahmadinejad has been playing in Iranian politics and how differing factional alignment in the conservative camp is creating new dynamics and narratives. It raises a lot of good points regarding domestic Iranian politics and the competitions which shape the Iranian polity, namely how weakening clerical legitimacy does not necessarily give space to Reformists, but may instead empower the Revolutionary Guards and the security apparatus.
The first article is an excellent piece on how the Obama administration has come up short in the domestic politics game and how Obama is stuck between trying to solidify his base and capturing centrists. Essentially, the article states that Obama will be deeply focusing on domestic affairs for at least up until the next election and will be unable to undertake serious foreign policy initiatives as that would take away focus from re-election.
The second analysis, a video, discusses the unique role Ahmadinejad has been playing in Iranian politics and how differing factional alignment in the conservative camp is creating new dynamics and narratives. It raises a lot of good points regarding domestic Iranian politics and the competitions which shape the Iranian polity, namely how weakening clerical legitimacy does not necessarily give space to Reformists, but may instead empower the Revolutionary Guards and the security apparatus.
American Hikers Freed
Press TV reports that the two remaining Americans "hikers" which had been detained for about two years by Iran left Mehrabad airport today.
The New York Times further added that these men are most likely headed to Oman, which probably played a crucial role in releasing them, just as the Omani government had with Sarah Shroud. It's not clear whether these individuals were actually spies are not, their story is a bit shady but the Iranians, for their part, unfortunately played into making this a political case instead of a judicial one. For example, they allowed the mothers of these individuals to visit them in a very publicized manner and allowed this story to take on a "humanitarian" spin, not a legal-procedural tone.
The New York Times further added that these men are most likely headed to Oman, which probably played a crucial role in releasing them, just as the Omani government had with Sarah Shroud. It's not clear whether these individuals were actually spies are not, their story is a bit shady but the Iranians, for their part, unfortunately played into making this a political case instead of a judicial one. For example, they allowed the mothers of these individuals to visit them in a very publicized manner and allowed this story to take on a "humanitarian" spin, not a legal-procedural tone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)