The Doha Spectacle

"Obama will have to ask himself, What kind of clowns am I dealing with here?"
•
Isn't that what every president since at least Reagan has been asking himself? There aren't a lot of new faces at the Arab League summit. The same dictators/monarchs have been running the show for decades. (Minus one--Saddam. If only I could remember which president rid the Arab League of a dictator. It must have been Obama.) It is now very clear that who the U.S. president is matters not a whit because the same entrenched self-interests are in power year after year after year. If they haven' realized the need or opportunity for change by now, then a new U.S. president surely isn't going to be an epiphany for them. Some U.S. presidents may be convenient whipping boys for some members of the Arab League, but if the proposition in the blog post is true--America "finally" has a president willing to work with all parties" (we'll just ignore his Secretary of State's Cheney-McCain-esque comments on Iran)--then why all the discord? The answer is and has been clear for some time--Arab dictators/monarchs (like all autocrats) care only about maintaing their own power, and the acceptance of a U.S. president goes only so far as he can help maintain that power. This applies to pro-U.S. autocrats as much as anti-U.S. autocrats. Any suggestion or action by a U.S. president or any Western government that an Arab autocrat has too much power or should share power or should democratize results in immediate pushback. (That's part of the reason for the lionizing of Bashir. The Arabs are showing they won't kowtow to Western demands and notions of right and wrong.)
•
But after all that is said, there may be hope. I read in the NYT yesterday that a Qatari diplomat criticized behavior at the summit by explaining that it was full of dictators who don't have to answer to anyone but themselves. If an Arab with some influence is saying this, then maybe other Arabs will listen, because they certainly haven't listened to the sitting U.S. president or any previous president.

"Wasn't it the height of hypocrisy that Arab leaders would rail against the ICC for prosecuting al-Bashir, while at the same time proposing at the summit the prosecution of Israeli leaders for the recent Gaza war that left 1,300 Palestinians dead?"
.
Scott, the ICC has already declared that they do not have jurisdiction over Israeli leaders because Israel did not sign the Rome Treaty (effecting the ICC). Where you see hypocrisy, I see fighting fire with fire and giving Israel a taste of their own medicine. How many times has Israel taken issues to the Security Council for enforcement against Iran, WITHOUT EVIDENCE, and caused punishment for that country? Israel, the same country that has had over 45 Security Council resolutions drawn against it only to be saved by the ridiculous veto power of the US. Israel has been using the security council not for the purposes of a shield (to protect world citizens) but as a sword.
.
Here, we see the Arabs using their collective power to do the same thing Israel has been doing for years -- engaging in war crimes with impunity. It's ridiculous, I'll give you that.
.
Keep in mind that one facet of Israeli policy is to use the old, "but why am I the only one getting in trouble for something that other people are doing?" rhetoric and to try and distract from their problems by putting attention on Sudan. As much as this sort of maneuver lacks integrity, the procedures and policies put in place allow for Israel to act in this way. For starters, there exists some sort of pipeline as to trying cases before the ICC. There is no real reason why Sudan and Israel can't be brought to justice at the same time. Additionally, the power of the US (Russian, Chinese, British, French, German) veto in the Security Council is a tool that renders great inequity upon our world. This power to give criminal states like Israel impunity for their war crimes, against the wishes of the majority of the UN, makes the UN seem more like a system of charades than one aimed at creating global unity and peace.
.
And because Israel acts this way, the Arab league follows. Why subject an Arab state to criminal prosecution while Israel roams the meadows scott-free? It would be hypocritical for the Arab League to act this way if Israel were actually in danger of being brought before the ICC, but as is the case, they have slithered away from justice again.

Scott you've been supposedly living in the region for something like 20 years, and only NOW?!? you're asking about the abilities of the Arab League as a governing body?
.
.
Really, what possible reason could you have to believe that the Arab League meetings were going to provide you with anything other than political theater. I mean this is not something new.
.
.
The real question should be is the Arab League the proper forum to review the capabilities of Arab diplomacy, and if so, why now, what has changed from previous meetings.
.
.
Part of that indeed has to go to the leadership issue. While you pointed to examples of 'aging autocrats', I believe that CGTX's comments about autocracy in particular is a more apt comment.
.
.
Looking at the region, you see relatively 'young' leaders in: Morocco, Jordan, Syria, and parts of the UAE. While not 'young', the leadership in Iraq has changed too. Meanwhile, both Libya and Egypt are witnessing a modest shifting of the guard with the sons of Mubarak and Khaddaffi taking broader political roles.

Excellent post Scott.
*
I really dont know why these dictators continue on meeting every year. I mean there is no point in their meetings, they just look stupid and hopeless. There is no strategy or vision at all. In one meeting they engage in personal attacks against each other and they reconcille in the next one. Pathetic...

Ah... I'm getting a feeling that if not for Israel Arabs of the area would just kill each other off. Hell even when they are united so strongly, on destroying Israel, like in 1973, they couldn't even agree on the day to attack! (Which by the way gave us just the time to move from the Egyptian front to the Syrian. Stupidity of Arabs saving our lives).

Oh and Persian Advocate,

Iran was not punished because of Israel. The world doesn't give a damn about Israel. Iran is being sanctioned because everyone understands the dangers of the crazy religious fanatic leading Iran (Khaminai, and don't give me bullsh*t about Ahmednijad leading Iran. He's just a puppet like Khatami and you know it) having a nuke (with PLENTY OF EVIDENCE). Because people understand that while the first target will be Tel-Aviv, the second might be New York. Or London.
That unlike Russia, which let me remind scared the hell out of everyone, radical Islam is not even a rational player, to analyse with game theory. The phenomenon of suicide bombers, (a lot of which are, by the way, sponsored and operated by Iran) shows that the followers of radical Islam do not care about their own destruction, as long as it causes the destruction of someone else (like a coffee shop in Haifa, as I remember all too well).
And yes, Haminai is as radical as you get without involving chemistry. With that fine mixture of hanging homosexuals and using terrorists, all following the "will of Alla", of course, what else do you call it?

And finally, because you just don't allow a country that openly finances and operates terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hizballah, and works closely with Pakistani terrorists attacking India as well, and repeats day and night that upon achieving the nuke it will work tirelessly on the destruction of another sovereign state, you just don't give such a country a nuclear weapon. Even Putin knows he's walking on a thin line with these madmen.

Beny,
Shame on you. More fabrications on your part and, surprise surprise, no links to supporting evidence.
---
"He's just a puppet like Khatami and you know it) having a nuke (with PLENTY OF EVIDENCE)" Yes, I've been trying to get dodoheads to understand that Ahmadinejad not only never called for genocide in Israel, but also that even if he did, he's not even the foremost authority in Iran -- more like a Whitehouse spokesman.
.
"The phenomenon of suicide bombers, (a lot of which are, by the way, sponsored and operated by Iran)" Funny how you create Iranian bogeymen here. Iranians have never, ever condoned suicide bombings or suicide bombed. In addition, there is NOT A SCINTILLA OF EVIDENCE to back your claim here other than presumptions and allegations by our beloved, trustworthy Israeli politicians.
.
"Iran was not punished because of Israel." Oh really, do you actually understand what you read in the paper???? I suggest deviating from the funnies section every now and then.
.
"With that fine mixture of hanging homosexuals" Did you know that the Mullahs condone and allow sex change operations in Iran? What a radical and liberal procedure as compared to this stark picture you paint of them being simply homophobic. I won't deny, however, that the Mullahs oppress their own people. This is none of your business or Israel's. We Iranians will handle our own -- that's the way we want to do it, so butt out.
.
"you just don't allow a country that openly finances and operates terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hizballah, and works closely with Pakistani terrorists attacking India as well, and repeats day and night that upon achieving the nuke it will work tirelessly on the destruction of another sovereign state, you just don't give such a country a nuclear weapon."Again, not a SCINTILLA OF EVIDENCE that Iran finances and operates Hamas, Hezbollah, and Pakistani terrorists. You claim that this is an open operation as well... I guess we've been doing undercover drug investigations for Mr. Butters in Beirut recently cause you're hallucinating. Also, show your evidence that Iran spends day and night calling for the destruction of Israel with nukes that it claims it plans to acquire (I'm not even touching this one). The readers, however, should know that there is evidence to support claims that Israel has a covert operations fund which funnels money to Jundullah, an officially reocgnized terrorist group that has killed Iranian civilians in terrorist attacks and has ties to Al Qaeda, and to the MKO, another officially recognized terrorist group. Israel has also, in the past, given a lot of money to PLO-Fatah terrorists and Hamas alike. This is all documented. http://www.jtf.org/israel/israel.israel.funds.hamas.terrorists.htm
.
I'm sure the readers here are more astute than to believe your fiction, Beny. As long as your spewing propaganda without substantive evidence, we'll yawn at you and ask that you move along.
.
PS - Scott, I have to say the title of this blog is fantastic.

[...] also recommend reading a critical blog post by Scott MacLeod for the Time [...]

I'll do Beny's work for him:

here (timesonline)
here (Before you discount this as coming from the Jeruslaem Post, its mention of a 13 year suicide bomber who is lauded as a martyr in Iran is indisputable.)
and here (If it's on the Huffington Post, it must be true, right Nick?)
•
As for Hezbollah and Hamas: here
And if you don't believe Haaretz:
here (al Manar--Hezbollah's TV station)
•
Nick, seriously, before you spout off (or pound tables, as JB says), do a little research. And as a lawyer, you should know that before making a statement of "fact," you need to make sure there isn't anything out there that proves your fact false. It's ironic that you condemn Beny for making statements without proof, yet you engage in the same activity and make statements that are easily proven inaccurate.

Clarification: The first group of links is about Iran's support for suicide bombing.

Don't go and pretend you can tell me how to act as a lawyer in a most-obnoxious manner. Really, take a look at the links you have supplied, CGTX. You obviously didn't do more than a shallow search on Google to find them. In no way do they indicate that Iranians commit terrorist acts of suicide bombing or call for them. These are threats of retaliation, SHOULD Iran be unjustifiably attacked, vis a vis military means. Do I agree with them? Helllll no, but that gives no causus belli to anyone to attack Iran.
.
Is this the Iran that the substantial majority of Iranians know & accept? No. This is a small extremist group that has consolidated power much thanks to the US backing of Saddam's invasion in the early 80s.
.
Like most Zionist claims, when brought to light, your evidence disintegrates quite quickly. And since you're teaching people who are far more qualified than you on how to be a lawyer, you should look up the Federal Rules of evidence 401-403, which dictate that evidence that is non-relevant and non-probative, like what you have supplied, is really just a buncha BS unacceptable before a reasonable factfinder like the average reader here.

Nick, you made a blanket statement: "Iranians have never, ever condoned suicide bombings or suicide bombed." After being confronted with evidence that your statement is false, you backtrack and talk about "self-defense" and claim to know the mind of the substantial majority of Iranians. Whatever.
•
You also conveniently ignore the nail in the coffin for your unbelievable "not a SCINTILLA OF EVIDENCE that Iran finances and operates Hamas, Hezbollah" statement" that I provided straight from Hezbollah TV's website. (For the record, I don't believe, nor is there proof, that Iran supports for Paki terrorists.)
•
By the way Nick, I am a lawyer and have been one much longer than you. FREs 401-403 wouldn't keep my evidence out of court. What you should concentrate on is Article 8 of the FREs which contains the rules for hearsay, which is what any quote from a website really is (whether provided by my "perfunctory" Googling or your diligent factfinding Googling). How you can say any website provided by me or you is irrelevant or nonprobative is mind boggling. It's not like anyone here would link to a website on fly fishing, which would be irrelevant and nonprobative.
•
And for the record, I'm not a Zionist, I'm not Jewish, I'm not an Arab or Muslim, and I'm not an Israel-do-or-die Christian zealot. I think Jewish settlements are both counterproductive and antagonistic. I have no great affection for Israel, but I do believe they get a bum rap most of the time. And what swayed me to this line of thinking was Sharon's displacement of the Gaza settlers. That was a tremendous show of good faith that was greeted with ambivalence (at best) and violence (at worst) by Palestinians and their fellow Arabs and Muslims. It became very clear at that time that nothing Israel did would be good enough short of every Jew packing up and leaving the region. And arguments about the legitimacy of Israel's founding are a moot point because Israel isn't going anywhere. What's done is done.
•
But wasn't this blog post about the dysfunction of the Arab League? Why does everything have to come back to Iran?

CGTX, congratulations on your many years of lawyering. I wish you many more or an early retirement with your riches, whichever is more appealing to you. I'm shocked, however, that someone with your years of expertise on matters of argument would just conveniently skirt the entire context of my post to make his point. Did you assume we couldn't scroll up or did you misread my post?
There, I was clearly replying to Beny's remark that suicide bombers "are ... sponsored and operated by Iran." This implies that the state of Iran effects and condones acts of terrorism committed by suicide bombers. This is a lie, so I asked Beny for evidence, and you supplied links that showed ONLY (1) that Iran was prepared to use suicide bombers, as it did to successfully beat off the Iraqis in the 80s with their superior military technology, IF anyone attacked Iran first and (2) that some Iranian students had signed up to give their lives to the cause in Gaza, which conservative estimates indicate was the outright murder of over 1300 civilians (over 200 of them children), under the occupation of Israel.
.
Both of these points illustrate nothing more than history; that in a defensive war, there are a small group of Iranians (out of 90,000,000 others globally) that will kill themselves for the sake of battling off invaders. Some call it courage and honor, others call it stupidity. I side with the latter, and I made that clear in my reply to you above. Your links, however, do not relate or tend to prove Beny's accusation that the government of Iran sponsors terrorism . In other words, you never even made it to Article 8, sir.
.
Your other links show that Hezbollah and Haaretz say that Ali Larijani declared Iran's "support" for Hezbollah, but they do not say that this support was financial or that Iran managed Hezbollah. I read this as being a show of Iran's power as a sovereign nation diametrically opposed to the Israeli actions against its neighbors, but not any evidence that Iran finances and operates Hamas or Hezbollah. Finally, this does not excuse Israel's funding of groups that the US and Europe have officially recognized as terrorist groups (including Hamas and the PLO) and the Jundullah and MEK which have ACTUALLY KILLED IRANIAN CIVILIANS (!!!!!!) !
.
I suppose in "Western Countries" they don't apologize for evidenced wrongs, but instead try to ratchet up fairy tales while committing more of them and playing the victim. Oh wait, I was born, raised, and grew up in one, the US, and we DON'T do that here! Maybe Israel isn't really a good representative of our Western culture after all...
.
To respond to your further, I never called for the harm of Israeli citizens, who by an overwhelming majority either were not born in Israel themselves or to parents that were. I did, however, call for a dismantling of the status quo, where the US feeds billions of taxpayer dollars to Israel to use to kill 200+ babies in 2009 alone. http://www.ifamericansknew.org .
.
You must be asking that last question of Beny.

Oh and by the way, it should be noted that the Iranian government banned the students who volunteered to fight the Israelis in Gaza from going to Gaza. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1053966.html

Arent there any moderators here??
*
Beny wrote:"Stupidity of Arabs saving our lives", this is a blunt racist comment and he must be banned. What would have happened if I had wrote:"stupidity of jews saving our lives"? humm?
Kindly take the necessary measures to clean this place from all racism. Thank you.

Arab politics can often be illusive, let alone messy.

The Arab League consists of nations with many natural resources in great abundance, yet it resembles more of a conglomeration of squabbling self-centred leaders than a united front. The League, if well orchestrated by capable heads of states, could well be a powerful voice in world politics and economy, especially in this hard time of global financial crisis.

Sadly, leaders are suspicious of the intention of one another. Such mistrust has been so deep rooted historically that nothing substantive ever emerged from the summits since the end of WWII. If each one comes to the summit with a covert agenda based on vested self-interest, why expect any solidarity?

Unity will continue to be as elusive as ever.
(Tan Boon Tee)

Typical -- praising the Arabs with faint damns ... They deserve much worse for hailing the butcher, Bashir.