During the Gaza war, the Israelis were spinning an impressive PR machine, that is true. When I was on the border with Gaza two weeks ago, IDF spokespeople would drive me around in their car showing me places where the Hamas rockets had hit, where all the new bunkers were, where I could see Gaza best from. They distributed long contact lists, names of people I could talk to, telephone numbers and languages spoken included: paramedics, trauma specialists, or just simple residents who were happy to talk about their experiences living under Palestinian rocket fire. Everybody loved to talk, usually very coherently and, inevitably, in good English. The IDF was also distributing photos and videos of the fighting in Gaza, of Israeli commandos discovering arms caches in mosques or Israeli pilots turning their rockets away in the last second when they noticed there were children near the target area. Have a look at their impressive YouTube channel. Nice videos for war freaks.
Does any of this really matter? I am not sure. The Israelis had a fairly strong case that needed little spinning anyway: it is true that few countries would tolerate being constantly rocketed by their neighbour, whatever else there is to the conflict. But then probably few countries would, or indeed could, rain down the fantastic destruction on their poor neighbour that Israel did on Gaza. I don't think any amount of spin can help your case when such is the imbalance of power, such is the destruction, and such powerful images (of dead children) keep streaming out of the war zone.
Indeed, I never understood those who complain and protest about how the world is supposedly with Israel and nobody cares about the poor Palestinians. It seems to me it's quite the opposite, at least in terms of sympathy (although perhaps not in America). In fact, I find it hard to think of a country with a more problematic image than Israel (perhaps North Korea?). Remember that poll a few years ago, it may have been Pew, that said large majorities in the world thought Israel the biggest threat to world peace? Spin that.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
"A legkönnyebb minket vádolni"
Origó, 2009. január 28.
A palesztinok szerint a zsidó telepesek, az izraeli gyarmatosítás, földjük elrablói jelentik a közel-keleti béke legfőbb akadályát. Egy részüket még a saját kormányuk is erővel telepítené ki. Sokan fegyverrel járnak, állandóan balhéznak a helyi palesztinokkal, és úgy érzik, nekik van igazuk. Ráadásul - mondják - őket a legkönnyebb vádolni a problémákért. Riport a ciszjordániai zsidó telepesekről.
Ashley Perry nem az a zavaros tekintetű, egyik kezében M16-ost, a másikban Bibliát lóbáló fanatikus. A pulóvert, farmert és szolid kipát viselő férfi 2000-ben vándorolt ki Izraelbe Nagy-Britanniából, és saját bevallása szerint is kicsit fura neki ez a keményvonalas nacionalista szerep, amit a legtöbben neki tulajdonítanak.
"Baloldali, szekuláris családban nőttem fel Londonban, egyáltalán nem voltunk vallásosak, hát még nacionalisták - de Nagy-Britanniában ki is nézik az embert, ha nagyon lobogtatja a zászlót" - mosolyog a politikai elemzőként dolgozó férfi lakásának az erkélyén állva, lábai előtt a lélegzetelállító látványt nyújtó Júdeai-sivataggal. A ház egy domb tetejére épült a Gus Ecion zsidó telepcsoport legelegánsabb részén, Efrat településen, alig húsz perc autóútra Jeruzsálemtől, Betlehem palesztin városa mellett.
Folytatás itt.
A palesztinok szerint a zsidó telepesek, az izraeli gyarmatosítás, földjük elrablói jelentik a közel-keleti béke legfőbb akadályát. Egy részüket még a saját kormányuk is erővel telepítené ki. Sokan fegyverrel járnak, állandóan balhéznak a helyi palesztinokkal, és úgy érzik, nekik van igazuk. Ráadásul - mondják - őket a legkönnyebb vádolni a problémákért. Riport a ciszjordániai zsidó telepesekről.
Ashley Perry nem az a zavaros tekintetű, egyik kezében M16-ost, a másikban Bibliát lóbáló fanatikus. A pulóvert, farmert és szolid kipát viselő férfi 2000-ben vándorolt ki Izraelbe Nagy-Britanniából, és saját bevallása szerint is kicsit fura neki ez a keményvonalas nacionalista szerep, amit a legtöbben neki tulajdonítanak.
"Baloldali, szekuláris családban nőttem fel Londonban, egyáltalán nem voltunk vallásosak, hát még nacionalisták - de Nagy-Britanniában ki is nézik az embert, ha nagyon lobogtatja a zászlót" - mosolyog a politikai elemzőként dolgozó férfi lakásának az erkélyén állva, lábai előtt a lélegzetelállító látványt nyújtó Júdeai-sivataggal. A ház egy domb tetejére épült a Gus Ecion zsidó telepcsoport legelegánsabb részén, Efrat településen, alig húsz perc autóútra Jeruzsálemtől, Betlehem palesztin városa mellett.
Folytatás itt.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Forget about balance, air the appeal
What is the BBC scared of? The Corporation must have taken to heart all that criticism about it being a left-wing news organisation that only cares about the poor Palestinian. It's decision not to air the Gaza aid appeal smacks of fear more than anything else - fear of being labelled a party to the conflict rather than its impartial descriptor. That is understandable: no sane person would want to wade into this morass, a moral swamp where seemingly everybody and nobody is right, and every intervention brings down fiery accusations of partiality from the other camp.
But the BBC is wrong. "Balance" means nothing. Journalistic objectivity is a mirage. Precisely because the overcharged nature of the conflict, all a news organisation can hope to be is fair: try as hard as it can to honestly report the suffering on both sides and explain the motives behind the actions. As long as it does that, no aid appeal should compromise its integrity. No amount of self-positioning will convince pro-Israeli viewers that the Corporation is not out to display Palestinians as innocent victims and nothing else. The BBC should worry about its reporting, not the opinions of its viewers.
But the real reason why the appeal should air is deeper. The money will help real people in real need. No tradesman should elevate his craft above his humanity. Fair reporting is important. But it is not an end in itself. Journalists must report fairly in the hope that showing the truth will help those in need. Why else show the world videos of dead children if, when the shooting stops, we stay away?
The BBC must remember what Kevin Carter did after he took that unforgettable picture of the starving Sudanese child with the hungry vulture in the background. He chased the vulture away.
But the BBC is wrong. "Balance" means nothing. Journalistic objectivity is a mirage. Precisely because the overcharged nature of the conflict, all a news organisation can hope to be is fair: try as hard as it can to honestly report the suffering on both sides and explain the motives behind the actions. As long as it does that, no aid appeal should compromise its integrity. No amount of self-positioning will convince pro-Israeli viewers that the Corporation is not out to display Palestinians as innocent victims and nothing else. The BBC should worry about its reporting, not the opinions of its viewers.
But the real reason why the appeal should air is deeper. The money will help real people in real need. No tradesman should elevate his craft above his humanity. Fair reporting is important. But it is not an end in itself. Journalists must report fairly in the hope that showing the truth will help those in need. Why else show the world videos of dead children if, when the shooting stops, we stay away?
The BBC must remember what Kevin Carter did after he took that unforgettable picture of the starving Sudanese child with the hungry vulture in the background. He chased the vulture away.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
"Manapság már az állatoknak is vannak jogaik"
Origo, január 24.
A Hamász szerint minden, ami Gázában történt, Izrael bűne, ők nem tesznek mást, csak ellenállnak a megszállásnak. A terrorizmust azért választották, mert sarokba szorították őket, és addig nem is nyugszanak, míg egész Palesztinát fel nem szabadítják. A gázai háborúról, polgári áldozatokról, terrorizmusról, és egy állandó megállapodásról kérdeztük Rafat Naszífot, a Hamász politbürójának tagját és ciszjordániai szóvivőjét.
A Hamász szerint minden, ami Gázában történt, Izrael bűne, ők nem tesznek mást, csak ellenállnak a megszállásnak. A terrorizmust azért választották, mert sarokba szorították őket, és addig nem is nyugszanak, míg egész Palesztinát fel nem szabadítják. A gázai háborúról, polgári áldozatokról, terrorizmusról, és egy állandó megállapodásról kérdeztük Rafat Naszífot, a Hamász politbürójának tagját és ciszjordániai szóvivőjét.
Egy kicsit sem terheli felelősség a Hamászt a gázai háborúért?
Persze hogy nem. Jogunk van hozzá, hogy harcoljunk a jogainkért. Elfogadtuk a [féléves] tűzszünetet 2008 júniusában, és tartottuk is magunkat hozzá, szemben Izraellel. Izrael soha nem oldotta fel Gáza blokádját, ami azóta tart, hogy [2007-ben] hatalomra kerültünk. Az ostrom lassan, napról-napra szorította ki a népünkből a lelket. De nem tudtak minket megsemmisíteni, ezért indították ezt a támadást Gáza ellen.
Folytatás itt.
Stop this Keynesian madness
Thank God Hungary has run out of cash.
As finance ministries the world over are trying to reboot their wobbly economies by shoveling cash into tax-cuts, bail-outs, and various clever and not so clever investments, here this is simply not an option.
Having just about avoided a currency crash and debt default, the government's hand are tied by an IMF bailout that forces it to actually cut spending, a seeming insanity at this time, but a welcome doze of reality for a country that's been living on borrowed money for too long.
What our elected politicians have been unable to deliver for a decade - reform our corrupt and wasteful public services that push taxes to levels unheard of in Eastern Europe - international pressure may yet force them to do. Empty treasuries wonderfully focus the mind, to paraphrase Dr Johnson.
What they also ought to do is remind you, in the midst of this neo-Keynesian hysteria gripping half the West, is that these consumption-boosting spending sprees, while now undoubtedly needed, in fact rarely work too well.
This is because ministers, suddenly relishing their role as some kind of Soviet central planners, have little idea exactly what investments will stimulate the economy, which is why this sort of thing is normally left to the market.
When I asked a leading proponent of the European Union's coordinated fiscal rescue plan, Prof André Sapir of Bruegel, the Brussels think-tank, what investments he had in mind that would both boost consumption and be useful on the long term so that the money doesn't go to waste, he admitted he couldn't think of any and that it was "a tough one."
Apart from directing money to the wrong places, stimulus packages tend to overshoot and so drive up inflation - exactly what happened in the seventies when this sort of thing was popular.
Another problem is that even open and democratic governments are susceptible to powerful interest groups and so tend to give public money not necessarily to those that need it most but to those that lobby best.
Giving cash away is suddenly in vogue. People will notice this and demand their share. Witness the sudden rush of aid to that abject failure of early 21st century capitalism, the motor company. Soon all kinds of "green" projects, unable to survive without public support anyway, will follow, perhaps to gain penitence for the money given to the car industry.
An added problem is that economies are now so intertwined that boosting government spending will likely end up stimulating your neighbours' economy - which is why European states are eyeing one another with some suspicion. It's unclear whether the EU will be of much use coordinating these spending plans.
But these lessons will be learnt and relearnt. Liberal capitalism in the West is hardly threatened. While some people demand the heads of bankers, there is no call to plow up Wall Street yet. The line between state and market may shift but basic assumptions are not questioned.
But while there is thankfully little money in Eastern Europe to join this madness, those underlying assumptions are less strongly held here. Governments will not succumb to outright anti-business demagoguery, if only because there are too many voters behind the till. But the case for free-market reforms, needed more than ever, is harder to present at a time when the very word market has become a near-swearword.
This mustn't be. We must remember that our rising prosperity is founded on free markets and trade with the global economy, as it has to be for a region poor in capital and natural resources. And that markets, while not infallible and need supervision, are the best tools to allocate labour and capital, surely better than newly-enthusiastic central planners and corruptible politicians. That the last 20 years, far from being a cautionary tale, have in fact been a great success story for free markets. Ask China, where some 300 million peasants have been lifted out of stone-age poverty.
We also need to remember that the threat that nearly did Hungary, Romania, Poland, and the Baltic states in, is not gone. It never is. But blaming the free market for the financial hurricane is like blaming the weather. It's pointless. The market is a given. Wishing its currents away is like wishing life was easier and then not doing anything about it. Prudence calls for shelter from the storm, not curses shouted in its face. It must be absolute in small and open economies. High debt levels, bulging current account deficits, reckless borrowing - they invite trouble because they expose a country to speculation.
Those things were not the market's fault. They are the fault of politicians. Politicians who dare not tell people that they cannot have their 13th and 14th month pensions in a rapidly aging and dwindling society, that they cannot have (supposedly) free-for-all public services where barely more than half of the working age population works, that they cannot expect to turn rich overnight in a region with the lowest productivity levels in Europe. That living on credit forever is a lie.
Eastern European governments must use the opportunity brought by the crisis and move ahead with privatizing their public-sector monoliths, from health to postal services, bringing down deficits, putting more people to work, and raising productivity levels. These challenges have not gone away just because there is a recession. They are more pressing than ever. But to do that, their politicians must get a grip on real life. You can hardly expect the EU and the IMF to save us every time.
As finance ministries the world over are trying to reboot their wobbly economies by shoveling cash into tax-cuts, bail-outs, and various clever and not so clever investments, here this is simply not an option.
Having just about avoided a currency crash and debt default, the government's hand are tied by an IMF bailout that forces it to actually cut spending, a seeming insanity at this time, but a welcome doze of reality for a country that's been living on borrowed money for too long.
What our elected politicians have been unable to deliver for a decade - reform our corrupt and wasteful public services that push taxes to levels unheard of in Eastern Europe - international pressure may yet force them to do. Empty treasuries wonderfully focus the mind, to paraphrase Dr Johnson.
What they also ought to do is remind you, in the midst of this neo-Keynesian hysteria gripping half the West, is that these consumption-boosting spending sprees, while now undoubtedly needed, in fact rarely work too well.
This is because ministers, suddenly relishing their role as some kind of Soviet central planners, have little idea exactly what investments will stimulate the economy, which is why this sort of thing is normally left to the market.
When I asked a leading proponent of the European Union's coordinated fiscal rescue plan, Prof André Sapir of Bruegel, the Brussels think-tank, what investments he had in mind that would both boost consumption and be useful on the long term so that the money doesn't go to waste, he admitted he couldn't think of any and that it was "a tough one."
Apart from directing money to the wrong places, stimulus packages tend to overshoot and so drive up inflation - exactly what happened in the seventies when this sort of thing was popular.
Another problem is that even open and democratic governments are susceptible to powerful interest groups and so tend to give public money not necessarily to those that need it most but to those that lobby best.
Giving cash away is suddenly in vogue. People will notice this and demand their share. Witness the sudden rush of aid to that abject failure of early 21st century capitalism, the motor company. Soon all kinds of "green" projects, unable to survive without public support anyway, will follow, perhaps to gain penitence for the money given to the car industry.
An added problem is that economies are now so intertwined that boosting government spending will likely end up stimulating your neighbours' economy - which is why European states are eyeing one another with some suspicion. It's unclear whether the EU will be of much use coordinating these spending plans.
But these lessons will be learnt and relearnt. Liberal capitalism in the West is hardly threatened. While some people demand the heads of bankers, there is no call to plow up Wall Street yet. The line between state and market may shift but basic assumptions are not questioned.
But while there is thankfully little money in Eastern Europe to join this madness, those underlying assumptions are less strongly held here. Governments will not succumb to outright anti-business demagoguery, if only because there are too many voters behind the till. But the case for free-market reforms, needed more than ever, is harder to present at a time when the very word market has become a near-swearword.
This mustn't be. We must remember that our rising prosperity is founded on free markets and trade with the global economy, as it has to be for a region poor in capital and natural resources. And that markets, while not infallible and need supervision, are the best tools to allocate labour and capital, surely better than newly-enthusiastic central planners and corruptible politicians. That the last 20 years, far from being a cautionary tale, have in fact been a great success story for free markets. Ask China, where some 300 million peasants have been lifted out of stone-age poverty.
We also need to remember that the threat that nearly did Hungary, Romania, Poland, and the Baltic states in, is not gone. It never is. But blaming the free market for the financial hurricane is like blaming the weather. It's pointless. The market is a given. Wishing its currents away is like wishing life was easier and then not doing anything about it. Prudence calls for shelter from the storm, not curses shouted in its face. It must be absolute in small and open economies. High debt levels, bulging current account deficits, reckless borrowing - they invite trouble because they expose a country to speculation.
Those things were not the market's fault. They are the fault of politicians. Politicians who dare not tell people that they cannot have their 13th and 14th month pensions in a rapidly aging and dwindling society, that they cannot have (supposedly) free-for-all public services where barely more than half of the working age population works, that they cannot expect to turn rich overnight in a region with the lowest productivity levels in Europe. That living on credit forever is a lie.
Eastern European governments must use the opportunity brought by the crisis and move ahead with privatizing their public-sector monoliths, from health to postal services, bringing down deficits, putting more people to work, and raising productivity levels. These challenges have not gone away just because there is a recession. They are more pressing than ever. But to do that, their politicians must get a grip on real life. You can hardly expect the EU and the IMF to save us every time.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Checkpoints
The checkpoints dotting the West Bank are really quite horrible. Euphemistically called "terminals" by the Israelis, they look and feel more like cattle-processing stations than anything else. It's all steel cage and dreariness, with surprisingly patient-looking Palestinians lined up in these long cage tunnels, waiting to be let through, and bored Israeli soldiers sitting behind bullet-proof windows, communicating only through speakerphones. Everything takes forever. You might be stranded there for hours, you might be sent back. The checkpoint might suddenly close altogether. Smaller stations can be equally bad with the soldiers obviously hating the whole thing and entertaining each other with their new mobile phones and mp3 players - while dozens of Palestinians wait in a car queue a mile long, festering in the West Bank heat. You complain, you get sent back. Few do - many even put up a good face and chat with the soldiers a bit. But you often get a glimpse of the hatred once the checkpoint is cleared. It is all very humiliating, really.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Hamas
I interviewed Rafat Nasif, a senior Hamas man who now serves as their spokesman on the West Bank, in Tulkarm. Slightly James Bond-esque stuff: the Palestinian Authority is cracking down on Hamas people on the West Bank at the moment and they're trying to stop journalists from seeing him. I went unnoticed until after the interview when PA police started asking questions about what I was doing in town, to which my fixer confidently replied, "interviewing a dancer." Oddly, this got us off the hook; he was laughing about it for hours afterwards.
On a more unhappy note, I haven't managed to get inside the Gaza strip in the end. Access is still limited and controlled by the Foreign Press Association of which I am not a member. Also, need to get back to Europe now, cheerio.
On a more unhappy note, I haven't managed to get inside the Gaza strip in the end. Access is still limited and controlled by the Foreign Press Association of which I am not a member. Also, need to get back to Europe now, cheerio.
Monday, January 19, 2009
The problem 2.
Okay, I have to admit that it is a lot harder to aportion blame for the war than I thought. For a while I thought that, for the most part, the blame was Israel's as they breached the ceasefire with their 4 November raid when they killed six Palestinian operatives before which Hamas was not shooting at Israel. But then it seems that the possibility of renewing the ceasefire was still open after the shooting restarted following the raid. There were in fact negotiations in Cairo which Hamas says broke down over Israel's refusal to open the border crossings, to stop operating in Gaza, and to extend the ceasefire to the West Bank. Israel says it was Hamas's fault because they didn't stop firing and half the weapons smuggling. Then Hamas openly called off the ceasefire on 20 December after which Israel attacked. Hamas made a last offer on 23 December but by then it was too late. So there you have it. Unless you can see into their heads, it seems to difficult to determine who is most clearly responsible. You can blame Hamas for openly dismissing the ceasefire and for provoking Israel to the point where they felt they had to react with massive force (as they always do, for heaven's sake, this could not have been so difficult to foresee). And you can blame Israel for initially breaking the ceasefire and for trying to strangle the whole strip with the blockade (and, of course, for using long-distance artillery in the most tightly populated area in the world). You can blame both for not trying harder to extend their wretched little agreement. And then you can endlessly speculate what was their real intention - but I wouldn't go there. It is hard to believe either of them cares too much about the people of Gaza.
"Csodálkozik, hogy ennyit dohányzunk?"
Origo, január 19.
A gázai konfliktus csak a jéghegy csúcsa, az izraeli-palesztin viszály mindennapjai nem ilyen drámaiak. Inkább csak fárasztóak, nyomorúságosak és megalázóak. Állandó konfliktus a katonaság, a palesztinok szerint növekvő zsidó telepek és a helyi palesztinok között. Az izraeli blokádban tönkrement gazdaság, munkanélküliség, izraeli ellenőrző pontok mindenütt, a katonai megszállás alatti élet minden megaláztatása. Riport a megszállt területekről.
Ibrahim Maklúfnak azóta van valamennyi nyugta, hogy felszerelt egy acélrácsot az ablakokra. Legalábbis akkor, ha nem megy ki a házból, pláne nem a domb felé, ahol a földje fekszik - illetve feküdt régen, amíg négy évvel ezelőtt néhány izraeli telepes család fel nem húzott rá egypár házat, csak úgy, szó nélkül. Az acélrács pedig azért kell - mondja -, mert a telepesek szombatonként lejönnek a hegyről és kövekkel dobálják meg a kis palesztin falu szélén fekvő házakat. Esetleg rájuk lőnek.
Folytatás itt.
A gázai konfliktus csak a jéghegy csúcsa, az izraeli-palesztin viszály mindennapjai nem ilyen drámaiak. Inkább csak fárasztóak, nyomorúságosak és megalázóak. Állandó konfliktus a katonaság, a palesztinok szerint növekvő zsidó telepek és a helyi palesztinok között. Az izraeli blokádban tönkrement gazdaság, munkanélküliség, izraeli ellenőrző pontok mindenütt, a katonai megszállás alatti élet minden megaláztatása. Riport a megszállt területekről.
Ibrahim Maklúfnak azóta van valamennyi nyugta, hogy felszerelt egy acélrácsot az ablakokra. Legalábbis akkor, ha nem megy ki a házból, pláne nem a domb felé, ahol a földje fekszik - illetve feküdt régen, amíg négy évvel ezelőtt néhány izraeli telepes család fel nem húzott rá egypár házat, csak úgy, szó nélkül. Az acélrács pedig azért kell - mondja -, mert a telepesek szombatonként lejönnek a hegyről és kövekkel dobálják meg a kis palesztin falu szélén fekvő házakat. Esetleg rájuk lőnek.
Folytatás itt.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Nablus 2.
Your hardy and weather-beaten war correspondent seems to spend half his time in the home of friendly Palestinians these days, trying to fight off cute little Arab kids who insist on pouring hot coffee down the front of his shirt or, as it happens, in his shoes. Never mind war-crazed militiamen, long-range artillery or blind aerial bombardment. The more I chase these wretched little wars, the more domicile my life seems to become. (Touch wood.) Even that hellhole, Afghanistan, doesn't scare me anymore. They'll be hosting the winter Olympics next time I get in, you can bet.
Anyway, what happened today was that I've been all around Nablus and in the surrounding villages, doing interviews with various everyday chaps and chapesses, trying to find out how people live under the occupation (forget about politics, can we now). For the most part, not very well - the economy is choked off by the Israeli blockade, road closures make life very difficult for everybody, and then there are all these crazy Israeli settlers to fight off. Plus there is the Israeli army (of whose exploits you may have heard lately). (Yes, I know. Many Palestinians go off killing Israelis, too.) See forthcoming article here.
The Erez crossing into Gaza might open tomorrow but only for pool journalists. Who do I bribe?
Anyway, what happened today was that I've been all around Nablus and in the surrounding villages, doing interviews with various everyday chaps and chapesses, trying to find out how people live under the occupation (forget about politics, can we now). For the most part, not very well - the economy is choked off by the Israeli blockade, road closures make life very difficult for everybody, and then there are all these crazy Israeli settlers to fight off. Plus there is the Israeli army (of whose exploits you may have heard lately). (Yes, I know. Many Palestinians go off killing Israelis, too.) See forthcoming article here.
The Erez crossing into Gaza might open tomorrow but only for pool journalists. Who do I bribe?
Saturday, January 17, 2009
The problem
One of the problems with the present Israeli narrative of victimhood (we're only defending ourselves against indiscriminate rocket fire and we had no other option left) is that it was Israel that broke the ceasefire when, on 7 November, it killed six Hamas operatives in a Gaza raid. The Israeli Defense Forces' own figures show that there was almost no rocket fire from Gaza throughout the ceasefire and the rockets that were fired came from groups other than Hamas (there is a video of the Israeli government spokesman admitting this here). Hamas only started firing again after the 7 November raid.
In other words, it looks more like the Israelis had planned this in advance and were in fact looking for a fight - which would be fair enough, I suppose, to the extent that they had had to live on their borders with a hostile organisation dedicated to their destruction and that had fired about 6,000 rockets at their cities for the last three years. But what if the ceasefire, that was in fact working, could have been extended? Had anybody tried? And it's hard to keep your sympathy after the wholesale slaughter in Gaza. There is a good article here by good old Simon Jenkins suggesting that long-distance shelling and aerial bombardment should simply be banned as lawful tools of war, along with delayed-action landmines, cluster bombs and other weapons that kill indiscriminately. Too late for the Gaza dead.
In other words, it looks more like the Israelis had planned this in advance and were in fact looking for a fight - which would be fair enough, I suppose, to the extent that they had had to live on their borders with a hostile organisation dedicated to their destruction and that had fired about 6,000 rockets at their cities for the last three years. But what if the ceasefire, that was in fact working, could have been extended? Had anybody tried? And it's hard to keep your sympathy after the wholesale slaughter in Gaza. There is a good article here by good old Simon Jenkins suggesting that long-distance shelling and aerial bombardment should simply be banned as lawful tools of war, along with delayed-action landmines, cluster bombs and other weapons that kill indiscriminately. Too late for the Gaza dead.
Nablus 1.
A bloke from the BBC has managed to sneak into Gaza from Egypt after waiting at the border crossing for three weeks - not sure how, officially it is closed and only aid agencies can get in. Perhaps he hid himself among sacks of rice? Donned aid agency clothes? (What are they like?) Adventureous. Perhaps I should try the same thing, the shooting is gonna be over in a few days anyway. Could be in Rafah in a day and wait for my chance.
In the meantime I'm in Nablus, a Palestinian city 45kms north of Ramallah on the northern West Bank. Travelling around here is a nightmare, there are three Israeli checkpoints on the main road between Ramallah and Nablus, people tell me it takes 2-3 hours to do the 45kms - unless the checkpoints are closed alltogether for security reasons, in which case nobody's going anywhere. Jewish settlements dot the hilltops everywhere and around Nablus alone there are three Israeli military bases. A kid on the bus told me that he has to go to Ramallah for school every day even though he lives just off Nablus because there are three checkpoints separating him from school there. No wonder people are somewhat upset.
In the meantime I'm in Nablus, a Palestinian city 45kms north of Ramallah on the northern West Bank. Travelling around here is a nightmare, there are three Israeli checkpoints on the main road between Ramallah and Nablus, people tell me it takes 2-3 hours to do the 45kms - unless the checkpoints are closed alltogether for security reasons, in which case nobody's going anywhere. Jewish settlements dot the hilltops everywhere and around Nablus alone there are three Israeli military bases. A kid on the bus told me that he has to go to Ramallah for school every day even though he lives just off Nablus because there are three checkpoints separating him from school there. No wonder people are somewhat upset.
Friday, January 16, 2009
"Hazugság, hogy Izrael az áldozat"
Origo.hu, január 16.
Míg Izraelben szinte mindenki egyetért abban, hogy a gázai hadművelet jogos önvédelem, a palesztinok egy kicsit máshogy látják a dolgokat. Szerintük Izrael szegte meg a tűzszünetet, a Hamász rakétái pedig komolytalanok ahhoz képest, amit Izrael művel Gázában, és nap nap után megkeseríti, ellehetetleníti a gettóba zárt palesztinok életét. Riport Ramallahból.
Amos Merav nem viccel. A megszállt palesztin területen élő zsidó telepes az 55-ös úton hajtott a kocsijával kedd este, amikor arab fiatalok kövekkel kezdték dobálni a kocsiját. Merav, hogy "megvédje magát" - ahogy egy szóvivő fogalmazott a Jerusalem Postnak -, egy M16-os automata gépkarabéllyal válaszolt, ami 5,56 mm-es ólomdarabokat lő ki háromszoros hangsebességgel. El is talált egy palesztin fiatalt, aki belehalt sérüléseibe, bár az izraeli halottkém utoljára azt mondta, nem a puskalövés okozta a halálát, hanem "valami más", egyelőre nem tudni, hogy micsoda. Meravot őrizetbe vette a rendőrség. A zsidó telepesek azért járnak fegyverrel, mert állandóan kövekkel, időnként Molotov-koktélokkal dobálják őket.
Folytatás itt.
Míg Izraelben szinte mindenki egyetért abban, hogy a gázai hadművelet jogos önvédelem, a palesztinok egy kicsit máshogy látják a dolgokat. Szerintük Izrael szegte meg a tűzszünetet, a Hamász rakétái pedig komolytalanok ahhoz képest, amit Izrael művel Gázában, és nap nap után megkeseríti, ellehetetleníti a gettóba zárt palesztinok életét. Riport Ramallahból.
Amos Merav nem viccel. A megszállt palesztin területen élő zsidó telepes az 55-ös úton hajtott a kocsijával kedd este, amikor arab fiatalok kövekkel kezdték dobálni a kocsiját. Merav, hogy "megvédje magát" - ahogy egy szóvivő fogalmazott a Jerusalem Postnak -, egy M16-os automata gépkarabéllyal válaszolt, ami 5,56 mm-es ólomdarabokat lő ki háromszoros hangsebességgel. El is talált egy palesztin fiatalt, aki belehalt sérüléseibe, bár az izraeli halottkém utoljára azt mondta, nem a puskalövés okozta a halálát, hanem "valami más", egyelőre nem tudni, hogy micsoda. Meravot őrizetbe vette a rendőrség. A zsidó telepesek azért járnak fegyverrel, mert állandóan kövekkel, időnként Molotov-koktélokkal dobálják őket.
Folytatás itt.
Tizenöt másodperc
Origo, január 15.
Izraelben szinte mindenki úgy érzi, igazságos a Gázai övezet ellen indított hadjárat. Nem volt más választásunk, éveken keresztül tűrtük az állandó rakétázást, senki más nem tolerálná ezt, tennünk kellett valamit - mondják a palesztin területek határán élők, akik szerint nem lehet napi tíz légiriadóval együtt élni, a gázai civil áldozatokról pedig a Hamász tehet. Helyszíni riport a gázai határról.
Tizenöt másodperc - ennyi ideig tart, amíg a palesztin rakéta eléri Szderótot az észleléstől számítva, ennyi idő van bukni. Ceva adom, ceva adom, ceva adom - riadó, riadó, riadó, visít mindenhol a szirénákból egy hideg géphang a békés, napsütötte helynek tűnő izraeli kisvárosban. Az autók megállnak ott, ahol vannak (már évek óta mindenki biztonsági öv nélkül közlekedik, hogy gyorsabban ki tudjon szállni a kocsiból), aki ült, feláll és szaladni kezd a legközelebbi óvóhely felé, aki túl messze van, a földre veti magát és eltakarja a fejét.
Folytatás itt.
Izraelben szinte mindenki úgy érzi, igazságos a Gázai övezet ellen indított hadjárat. Nem volt más választásunk, éveken keresztül tűrtük az állandó rakétázást, senki más nem tolerálná ezt, tennünk kellett valamit - mondják a palesztin területek határán élők, akik szerint nem lehet napi tíz légiriadóval együtt élni, a gázai civil áldozatokról pedig a Hamász tehet. Helyszíni riport a gázai határról.
Tizenöt másodperc - ennyi ideig tart, amíg a palesztin rakéta eléri Szderótot az észleléstől számítva, ennyi idő van bukni. Ceva adom, ceva adom, ceva adom - riadó, riadó, riadó, visít mindenhol a szirénákból egy hideg géphang a békés, napsütötte helynek tűnő izraeli kisvárosban. Az autók megállnak ott, ahol vannak (már évek óta mindenki biztonsági öv nélkül közlekedik, hogy gyorsabban ki tudjon szállni a kocsiból), aki ült, feláll és szaladni kezd a legközelebbi óvóhely felé, aki túl messze van, a földre veti magát és eltakarja a fejét.
Folytatás itt.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Sderot 2.
I realise that I am probably the last person who can complain about this but war-spotting has become almost a sport in Sderot. It is only a short walk away from the Gaza border and there are all these convenient little hills overlooking the strip. Never mind the dozens of journalists looking bored and smoking irritably on these spots, flashing their cameras like crazy when an airstrike sends a column of smoke into the air, there are also a large number of civilians just hanging out. Some have even brought little camping chairs, hubble-bubbles to smoke, plus little binoculars to better see the war. There was a group of religious Jews who even brought their various musical instruments and blew them with enthusiasm after each BANG coming from Gaza. An Italian photojournalist friend took a few pretty good shots at these lads, you can see them here. Not everybody was so happy at the bloody festival raging down there, to be sure, but all those I spoke to were supportive of it.
Jerusalem 3.
There is a militarism to Israeli society that seeps into everyday life. It's not just the off-duty soldiers walking around everywhere with the old M16 casually flung over the shoulder, or the ubiquity of armed police. Or even the fact that girls are drafted into the army as obviously as boys. It goes beyond that. An Israeli friend told me yesterday how she and her entire class was taken for a day of shooting while still back in grammar school. They practice-shot with Kalashnikovs, for heaven's sake. And then they have these military-style camps for kids. I mean talk about Sparta. I know they have enemies but isn't this overdoing it a bit?
I've been thinking a bit about that apocalyptical view, widely held here, of Israel being surrounded by deadly enemies it must constantly fight to keep at bay and preserve her very existence. I realise that these threats are not always easy to calibrate, but I suspect that many people here do not fully realise just how much stronger they are than the Arabs. No conventional army, not even those of Syria and Egypt combined, has the remotest chance of defeating Israel in battle. And while unconventional threats like Hezbollah and Hamas are harder, or perhaps even impossible, to defeat and deter with conventional means, they are also incapable of inflicting too much pain.
"These rockets can make life intolerable for tens of thousands of Israelis but they are not an existential threat," Efraim Kam, a security analyst at Tel Aviv University and a former military intelligence man, told me. Kam argued that, contrary to popular perception, Israel's strategic environment is much better than it was for much of its existence. There are peace treaties with Egypt, the predominant Arab military power, and Jordan. Israel's overwhelming superiority in arms means that even the Syrian border has been secure for decades. Contrast that with the sixties and the seventies when Israel had to fight major Arab powers on many fronts at the same time.
Of course, if Iran ever puts together a nuclear warhead (which most Western intelligence agencies now think may happen in as little as a year), things may look a bit different. "We have no idea what will happen then," Kam said. Presumably this is why the Israeli government asked the US for a few bunker-busting bombs, the type that might penetrate the underground Iranian nuclear installations. Have a good day.
Anyway, I'm out of the bomb shelters now and back in Jerusalem. It's cold, cold, cold!
I've been thinking a bit about that apocalyptical view, widely held here, of Israel being surrounded by deadly enemies it must constantly fight to keep at bay and preserve her very existence. I realise that these threats are not always easy to calibrate, but I suspect that many people here do not fully realise just how much stronger they are than the Arabs. No conventional army, not even those of Syria and Egypt combined, has the remotest chance of defeating Israel in battle. And while unconventional threats like Hezbollah and Hamas are harder, or perhaps even impossible, to defeat and deter with conventional means, they are also incapable of inflicting too much pain.
"These rockets can make life intolerable for tens of thousands of Israelis but they are not an existential threat," Efraim Kam, a security analyst at Tel Aviv University and a former military intelligence man, told me. Kam argued that, contrary to popular perception, Israel's strategic environment is much better than it was for much of its existence. There are peace treaties with Egypt, the predominant Arab military power, and Jordan. Israel's overwhelming superiority in arms means that even the Syrian border has been secure for decades. Contrast that with the sixties and the seventies when Israel had to fight major Arab powers on many fronts at the same time.
Of course, if Iran ever puts together a nuclear warhead (which most Western intelligence agencies now think may happen in as little as a year), things may look a bit different. "We have no idea what will happen then," Kam said. Presumably this is why the Israeli government asked the US for a few bunker-busting bombs, the type that might penetrate the underground Iranian nuclear installations. Have a good day.
Anyway, I'm out of the bomb shelters now and back in Jerusalem. It's cold, cold, cold!
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Sderot 1.
This little Israeli town on the Gaza border is the oddest place. Obviously the destruction is in no way comparable to that unleashed on Gaza now by Israel, but the constant rocket fire by Hamas has left its marks. Every house seems to has its own bomb shelter, the bus stops have been turned into rocket-resistant blocks, not to mention the extra shelters standing just about everywhere in this otherwise sweet and peaceful-looking city.
I tried to listen to people as symphatetically as I could - but you only really get it when the warning sirens first catch you on the street. It's really a machine voice repeating coldly and loudly, red alert, red alert, red alert. Cars stop where they are, people stand up if they were sitting and dash for the first shelter - or lie on the ground, their hands covering their head. Fifteen seconds from warning to splash.
You run for the first bunker, people crowded in already, their nervous laughter masking visible fear - rocket fire has been a constant and everyday threat here for the last eight years and especially since the 2005 Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza strip. You hear the thump somewhere as the Qassam hits, people breath in and out, produce more of their nervous laughter and then filter out. A few sad car alarms are crying somewhere; there is a little knot in your stomach.
In 2008 alone, some 3,000 rockets and mortar bombs have been fired at Israeli towns around the Gaza strip, according to the Israeli military. In Sderot, these attacks have killed eight persons, wounded hundreds (since 2001), and caused 3,000 people to give up and move away alltogether. I am told kids as old as 13 and 14 still wet their beds here.
*
Israel is still preventing international journalists from entering the Gaza strip.
I tried to listen to people as symphatetically as I could - but you only really get it when the warning sirens first catch you on the street. It's really a machine voice repeating coldly and loudly, red alert, red alert, red alert. Cars stop where they are, people stand up if they were sitting and dash for the first shelter - or lie on the ground, their hands covering their head. Fifteen seconds from warning to splash.
You run for the first bunker, people crowded in already, their nervous laughter masking visible fear - rocket fire has been a constant and everyday threat here for the last eight years and especially since the 2005 Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza strip. You hear the thump somewhere as the Qassam hits, people breath in and out, produce more of their nervous laughter and then filter out. A few sad car alarms are crying somewhere; there is a little knot in your stomach.
In 2008 alone, some 3,000 rockets and mortar bombs have been fired at Israeli towns around the Gaza strip, according to the Israeli military. In Sderot, these attacks have killed eight persons, wounded hundreds (since 2001), and caused 3,000 people to give up and move away alltogether. I am told kids as old as 13 and 14 still wet their beds here.
*
Israel is still preventing international journalists from entering the Gaza strip.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Gilo
Went up to Gilo, a Jewish settlement just to the south of Jerusalem this afternoon. While technically a settlement built on occupied Palestinian land, it has grown so big (population 40,000) that it is now essentially an outskirt of Jerusalem. Gilo is a very interesting place because it lies just across the valley from Beit Jala, a Palestinian town controlled by the Palestinian Authority. They are so close you get the illusion that you can almost reach across the valley floor and touch the buildings opposite. Gilo came under fire from Palestinian gunmen in 2000 but has been peaceful for years. It illustrates wonderfully the strategic dilemma Israel is facing, though, which is this.
Having retreated from South Lebanon in 2000, Israel brought Northern Israel within range for Hezbollah rockets (and was hammered by them quite badly during the 2006 war). Having retreated from the Gaza strip, it brought the towns of the western Negev within range for Hamas rockets. These withdrawals, designed to get rid of the dilemmas and burdens of occupying Arab land, didn't work out too well because they simply brought the frontline closer to home. The problem is that if Israel fully retreats from the West Bank and places like Beit Jala should ever fall under the control of an organisation like Hamas, the rockets will not be falling on Nahariya and Sderot. They'll be falling on Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.
This isn't, naturally, an argument for keeping the West Bank under occupation. That must end. But it points to the heart of the dilemma which is that the Israelis and the Palestinians are so intertwined on this tiny piece of land that separation is going to be a lot harder than people thought a few years ago when the idea of unilateral Israel disengagement came into vogue. After the 2006 war with Hezbollah, it went out of fashion. Gilo and Beit Jala are the places to see to understand why.
Having retreated from South Lebanon in 2000, Israel brought Northern Israel within range for Hezbollah rockets (and was hammered by them quite badly during the 2006 war). Having retreated from the Gaza strip, it brought the towns of the western Negev within range for Hamas rockets. These withdrawals, designed to get rid of the dilemmas and burdens of occupying Arab land, didn't work out too well because they simply brought the frontline closer to home. The problem is that if Israel fully retreats from the West Bank and places like Beit Jala should ever fall under the control of an organisation like Hamas, the rockets will not be falling on Nahariya and Sderot. They'll be falling on Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.
This isn't, naturally, an argument for keeping the West Bank under occupation. That must end. But it points to the heart of the dilemma which is that the Israelis and the Palestinians are so intertwined on this tiny piece of land that separation is going to be a lot harder than people thought a few years ago when the idea of unilateral Israel disengagement came into vogue. After the 2006 war with Hezbollah, it went out of fashion. Gilo and Beit Jala are the places to see to understand why.
Jerusalem 2.
Well, this morning's Haaretz says the Israeli government is divided about whether to go ahead with the offensive and push into the more populated areas of the Gaza strip (PM Olmert) or start winding things up (Tzipi and Barak). At the same time, Hamas rocket fire seems to have dropped by about half to no more than 30 rockets a day into Israel. There are also reports that senior Hamas leaders have fled to Egypt. They have even reopened schools in Sderot, the Israeli border town most directly affected by Palestinian fire. A friend said very cleverly this morning that now that I'm in position there is sure to be a ceasefire in a few days. Inshallah. Heading down to the border tomorrow morning, so come back for more, hope to have pictures and video as well.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Jerusalem 1.
Well, the Israelis are not getting any more relaxed about security. Took two hours of questioning by four separate agents plus packing and unpacking my stuff to board my flight from Budapest to Tel Aviv and then another round of the same thing at Ben Gurion. Things got so bad they were cross-checking the name of my grandfather and ringing people up in three different countries to check my story. With hindsight, it was probably a mistake to mention that small thing with Beirut.
Mind, there’s a Canadian bloke in the hotel (sweet little thing in the old city of Jerusalem) who came in from Afghanistan where he was working with Nato doing reconstruction work. He is on holiday. He was held at the airport for three hours, he said. „So, sir… You’re saying you are a tourist and you came to Israel during wartime from… Afghanistan? Are you sure this is the story you’re sticking to?” Right.
On a lighter note, it feels like spring here, a relief after the North Pole-like conditions of Hungary. Palm trees, man, palm trees.
Tomorrow accreditations and interviews.
Mind, there’s a Canadian bloke in the hotel (sweet little thing in the old city of Jerusalem) who came in from Afghanistan where he was working with Nato doing reconstruction work. He is on holiday. He was held at the airport for three hours, he said. „So, sir… You’re saying you are a tourist and you came to Israel during wartime from… Afghanistan? Are you sure this is the story you’re sticking to?” Right.
On a lighter note, it feels like spring here, a relief after the North Pole-like conditions of Hungary. Palm trees, man, palm trees.
Tomorrow accreditations and interviews.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Off to Israel
On a more exciting topic than this silly gas affair, I'll be flying down to Israel on Sunday for two weeks to write about the war for Origo.hu. At the moment it seems next to impossible to get into Gaza as the Israelis are allowing only a few TV men in a day, embedded with their military. I'm praying there is a ceasefire agreement in a few days or a week and then the Erez border crossing into the strip will reopen. Then I'll go in for a few days, now also armed with a little camera (multiplatforming, what?). Check back for updates, this should be very exciting and, naturally, great journalism.
It's the politics, stupid
Transitions Online, 7 January, 2008
Weak democratic politics lies behind weak Central and Eastern European economies. The challenge is to change that if we are serious about reform.
A much-quoted study by Berlin’s Hertie School of Governance in 2007 lamented the state of politics in the new members of the European Union. Central and Eastern Europeans, supposedly models of democratic and free-markets reforms, were showing signs of slipping.
The author, Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, worried about populism, political radicalism, a weak press, unstable governments, too much and too noisy party politics, and occasional violations of democratic standards all across the region.
"Scenes of opposition-backed demonstrators trying to bring down the government through an insurrection reminded one more of Kyrgyzstan than of Central Europe," she remarked of the 2006 street demonstrations in Budapest.
MISGUIDED OPTIMISM
The immediate problem with this (well-diagnosed) state of politics is that weak politics produces a weak economy, something we should worry about after half the region has just been bailed out by the IMF.
The view used to be that politics in the new member states was perfectly up to the task of modernizing these countries and turning their moribund economies into shiny cruisers on the waves of global capitalism (Slovenia), or at least half-decent sailboats (Hungary).
After all, this is just what happened in the 1990s. In only 14 years, the region’s countries joined the European Union, sporting consistently higher growth rates than the core Western states, plus unproblematic, if not always perfectly civil, parliamentary politics. Surely their elites could handle the credit crunch and its aftermath?
Apparently not. Politics here has become louder, more unstable, and childish. Misplaced optimism ignores the fact that the much-vaunted reforms of the 1990s and early 2000s happened largely under pressure from the EU. With membership gained, this decisive outside influence is gone.
It is now up to us and we're not doing too well. Look at, among other things, the catastrophic deterioration of Hungarian public finances from 2001 to 2006, driven by the costly, vote-buying populism of Hungary's politicians, and yanked back to semi-normality only after EU intervention. Our leaders are not only not up to managing crises, they can't even be trusted with the money at a time of global boom.
TOO FEW STAKEHOLDERS
Why? Classic republicanism in the 18th and 19th centuries emphasized the need for stakeholders, meaning property owners and only them, to be represented in political decision-making, meaning the levying of taxes. Republicans feared universal suffrage because they worried that the poor would try to use state power to take money away from the rich. Today this is not as worrisome as it used to be, primarily because in the West most people are relatively well off: there is little fear that they will rob their betters (although some argue that progressive taxation does just that).
One reason democratic politics is underperforming so badly in Eastern Europe is that the majority of people are not stakeholders in the economy in the classic republican sense (that is, they have little or no work and they don't pay taxes). They still expect taxpayers to look after them via an array of expensive benefits – of course, often with every right, as in the case of the old.
In Hungary barely a third of the population pays taxes. Two-thirds are dependent. This makes a policy of reform hugely difficult, because there is always a vote-chasing politician to represent their cause. Many of these people depend on publicly funded services. Their sheer numbers mean, under democratic rules, that these services have become essentially untouchable, even though they are bankrupting us all. Rapid aging, fewer babies, and almost no immigration mean that this is set to worsen, unless employment rates are raised dramatically, because the number of dependents is growing.
The point, of course, is not that the vote should be taken away from poor people. As the political scientist Robert Dahl said, when the institutions of democracy are weak, the answer is not that they should be scrapped. The answer is that they must be strengthened.
How? The fact is that a relatively weak tax-bearing middle class is the main reason for the region's political woes. Were there more people suffering from Hungary's prohibitive taxation, it would be easier to battle its benefit lobbies, easier to reform its dying public services. At present hardly anyone carries the load, because so few people work. Changing this equation is the challenge for countries like Hungary and Poland if they wish to make a success of their still-moribund economies. There could be worse ways to start than by putting more people to work.
Weak democratic politics lies behind weak Central and Eastern European economies. The challenge is to change that if we are serious about reform.
A much-quoted study by Berlin’s Hertie School of Governance in 2007 lamented the state of politics in the new members of the European Union. Central and Eastern Europeans, supposedly models of democratic and free-markets reforms, were showing signs of slipping.
The author, Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, worried about populism, political radicalism, a weak press, unstable governments, too much and too noisy party politics, and occasional violations of democratic standards all across the region.
"Scenes of opposition-backed demonstrators trying to bring down the government through an insurrection reminded one more of Kyrgyzstan than of Central Europe," she remarked of the 2006 street demonstrations in Budapest.
MISGUIDED OPTIMISM
The immediate problem with this (well-diagnosed) state of politics is that weak politics produces a weak economy, something we should worry about after half the region has just been bailed out by the IMF.
The view used to be that politics in the new member states was perfectly up to the task of modernizing these countries and turning their moribund economies into shiny cruisers on the waves of global capitalism (Slovenia), or at least half-decent sailboats (Hungary).
After all, this is just what happened in the 1990s. In only 14 years, the region’s countries joined the European Union, sporting consistently higher growth rates than the core Western states, plus unproblematic, if not always perfectly civil, parliamentary politics. Surely their elites could handle the credit crunch and its aftermath?
Apparently not. Politics here has become louder, more unstable, and childish. Misplaced optimism ignores the fact that the much-vaunted reforms of the 1990s and early 2000s happened largely under pressure from the EU. With membership gained, this decisive outside influence is gone.
It is now up to us and we're not doing too well. Look at, among other things, the catastrophic deterioration of Hungarian public finances from 2001 to 2006, driven by the costly, vote-buying populism of Hungary's politicians, and yanked back to semi-normality only after EU intervention. Our leaders are not only not up to managing crises, they can't even be trusted with the money at a time of global boom.
TOO FEW STAKEHOLDERS
Why? Classic republicanism in the 18th and 19th centuries emphasized the need for stakeholders, meaning property owners and only them, to be represented in political decision-making, meaning the levying of taxes. Republicans feared universal suffrage because they worried that the poor would try to use state power to take money away from the rich. Today this is not as worrisome as it used to be, primarily because in the West most people are relatively well off: there is little fear that they will rob their betters (although some argue that progressive taxation does just that).
One reason democratic politics is underperforming so badly in Eastern Europe is that the majority of people are not stakeholders in the economy in the classic republican sense (that is, they have little or no work and they don't pay taxes). They still expect taxpayers to look after them via an array of expensive benefits – of course, often with every right, as in the case of the old.
In Hungary barely a third of the population pays taxes. Two-thirds are dependent. This makes a policy of reform hugely difficult, because there is always a vote-chasing politician to represent their cause. Many of these people depend on publicly funded services. Their sheer numbers mean, under democratic rules, that these services have become essentially untouchable, even though they are bankrupting us all. Rapid aging, fewer babies, and almost no immigration mean that this is set to worsen, unless employment rates are raised dramatically, because the number of dependents is growing.
The point, of course, is not that the vote should be taken away from poor people. As the political scientist Robert Dahl said, when the institutions of democracy are weak, the answer is not that they should be scrapped. The answer is that they must be strengthened.
How? The fact is that a relatively weak tax-bearing middle class is the main reason for the region's political woes. Were there more people suffering from Hungary's prohibitive taxation, it would be easier to battle its benefit lobbies, easier to reform its dying public services. At present hardly anyone carries the load, because so few people work. Changing this equation is the challenge for countries like Hungary and Poland if they wish to make a success of their still-moribund economies. There could be worse ways to start than by putting more people to work.
Cold!
As we're freezing to death in Eastern Europe (or so they tell me) while the Russians are having another one of their seizures, it's good to keep things in perspective. Gideon Rachman of the FT points to this piece of research that says the EU's dependence on Russian gas is smaller than customarily thought and has actually fallen by half since 1980. Of course that's small comfort to individual countries that are largely dependent on Russian imports (such as Hungary). But it does suggest that the solution might lie closer to home than desperately looking for alternative external sources: make the EU's internal market in energy more efficient so that energy-richer states can help out the needier ones when the seizure comes again (it will).
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Beijing moves to stifle reform calls
The Chinese government is moving to crush a group of prominent dissidents and intellectuals that has released a rallying call for democracy, human rights and rule of law.
FT article on Charter 08.
This is very interesting stuff. Its central claim is a rebuff to those who in the West argue that China seems to be doing just fine without liberal democracy and the rule of law, and its drive to modernise is in fact made easier by not having to pay attention to all these silly Western ideas.
The Charter says:
Read the whole thing here.
FT article on Charter 08.
This is very interesting stuff. Its central claim is a rebuff to those who in the West argue that China seems to be doing just fine without liberal democracy and the rule of law, and its drive to modernise is in fact made easier by not having to pay attention to all these silly Western ideas.
The Charter says:
The ruling elite continues to cling to its authoritarian power and fights off any move toward political change. The stultifying results are endemic official corruption, an undermining of the rule of law, weak human rights, decay in public ethics, crony capitalism, growing inequality between the wealthy and the poor, pillage of the natural environment as well as of the human and historical environments, and the exacerbation of a long list of social conflicts, especially, in recent times, a sharpening animosity between officials and ordinary people.
As these conflicts and crises grow ever more intense, and as the ruling elite continues with impunity to crush and to strip away the rights of citizens to freedom, to property, and to the pursuit of happiness, we see the powerless in our society—the vulnerable groups, the people who have been suppressed and monitored, who have suffered cruelty and even torture, and who have had no adequate avenues for their protests, no courts to hear their pleas—becoming more militant and raising the possibility of a violent conflict of disastrous proportions. The decline of the current system has reached the point where change is no longer optional.
Read the whole thing here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
