« February 2004 | April 2004 »

March 2004 Archives

March 31, 2004

Iraq: an ugly day

I watched the fairly graphic video of the murder of the presumed American civilians in or around Falluja. It was disturbing. As disturbing was the fact that my maid, an Iraqi Shiite was clearly happy.

Well, I warned a year ago that invading Iraq in the circumstances which the US set up for itself was opening Pandora's box. The cycle of rage and revenge I think is not breakable now - not with US troops at least. I have a hard time seeing a way out of this, ever harder. Regardless, recall I noted the oreintation for staff heading in-country.

The descent into pure barbarism is a rather bad sign.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 05:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Cyprus

Well, not part of most of your interests, but something I have been following for a variety of reasons.

It appears Cyprus is within inches of finding a solution to the division, for the first time since the 1960s on equitable grounds.

The UN with EU leverage has been doing some real arm twisting and we can see the results, although I am afraid the Greeks and Turks will blow up the deal, from the both sides the local leadership has shown no small amount of bad will although always finding an excuse to blame it on the other side.

The main hurdle at present, of course, is the "right of return" of the Greeks to the North. It appears there is going to be some kind of limitation on this, as the Turks are afraid of being overwhelmed by the richer, better prepared Greeks. Not a pretty compromise but likely necessary. Certainly a compensation fund is likely necessary for both sides. The other rumored point is a right for the militaries to remain in place to guarantee the deal.

Well, it may yet happen, if so it is a good.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 09:14 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

March 29, 2004

Afghanistan, it is a pity that my predictions were spot on

As those who knew me back in my commenting days on a message board called SDMB, I rather strenoushly argued after the fall of the Taleban that the promises of a Marshal plan for Afghanistan, or remaking and saving it from its failed status would be hollow. They will also recall that the pre-fooled argued, oh no, that this would be a real effort.

I share this by way of reminding people, when we are thinking of such situations, it is usually helpful to be boundless cynical:

UN warns on Afghanistan reverting to terrorism
By Hugh Williamson in Berlin and Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad
Published: March 28 2004 21:59 | Last Updated: March 28 2004 21:59

A United Nations body will warn this week that Afghanistan is in danger of reverting to a "terrorist breeding ground" with an economy dependent on the illegal drug trade unless the international community significantly increases development funding to the war-torn country.

...

The report, obtained by the Financial Times, complains that "aid . . . has been much lower than expected or promised. In comparison to other conflict or post-conflict situations Afghanistan appears to have been neglected".

...

The UNDP report notes Iraq is receiving "10 times as much development assistance with roughly the same size of population". Development inflows amount to $67 per person, compared with $248 in Bosnia Herzegovina and $256 in East Timor, according to the report.

The report's strong language increases the likelihood of tough financial negotiations at this week's conference, to be co-chaired by Afghanistan, the UN, Germany and Japan.

The Afghan government is due to present a seven-year, $28bn funding programme, while western governments have indicated that funding commitments, lasting four years at most, are unlikely to exceed the $4.5bn pledged by donors in Tokyo in 2002.

....

The report, which compiles the UN's latest data on Afghanistan, says the country's $4bn estimated GDP is small compared with the $14bn in "military costs" spent annually in Afghanistan by western powers.

Over half the population live in extreme poverty and only Sierra Leone ranks below Afghanistan on the UNDP's human development index. Life expectancy, at below 50, is "similar to that which prevailed in the 19th century in Europe".

Separately, Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, insisted the US had not over looked the terrorist threat from Afghanistan in the days before and after the September 11 attacks.

"If one looks at what was done, we went to Afghanistan - we didn't go to Iraq," he told ABC News.

"It certainly took away their training, their haven and it certainly destroyed the Taliban and eliminated them from running the country. That's what the president's action was. It wasn't Iraq. It was Afghanistan."

Rumsfeld position, of course, is analytically incoherent.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 01:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Terror & States, a brief comment

One of the items that I have noted in the furor regarding Clarke is the issue of the analysis and blinders re terror organizations.

I think there is something very spot on in the note that the main Bush team has clung to the comfortable state-based assumptions regarding terror organizations. It strikes me as clear that there is indeed - even now - an unexamined presumption rooted in the old Cold War analytical frameworks that so very, very infects them that things do not happen outside of a state framework.

It's a great pity as while clearly state support can be useful, as clearly the Islamic radical organizations have been, on the level of terror, been able to do very well indeed without really substantive state support. Taking out the "Axis of Evil" - in short - is fighting WWI instead of WWII, if you take my meaning.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 01:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Clarke, a brief note

Of course the book is not available out here - but what I learn about him, I like - ex-some comments in re cyber-terror which strike me as chicken-littlism. I rather dislike this line of argumentation or smearing that because Clarke is a bitter critic of the Administration's mind numbingly stupid FP that he's a "liberal." He rather seems to be someone like myself - and we need more of that, less of this lick-booting lock-stepping in political life.

Looking forward to my upcoming swing through New York, pick up the text in question and learn more.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 01:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

French Elections

Interesting results there. I hope this is not going to roll back economic reforms that France rather needs, and badly. And Germany. My interest, of course, is as much personal as theoretical. European economic stagnation does not serve me well, above all in terms of North African plays.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 01:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

March 28, 2004

The Reform Summit, there is the reality (added Le Monde reference)

Well, I know American "conservative" commentators (hereafter, "the pre-fooled") have been fellating themselves over supposed winds of change in the region that they so badly want to demonstrate that the Iraq fiasco makes any sense at all, however here's a brutal look at the reality:

Arab Summit Meeting Collapses Over Reforms
By NEIL MacFARQUHAR
Published: March 28, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/28/international/middleeast/28ARAB.html

"TUNIS, Tunisia, March 27 — The summit meeting of Arab leaders billed as the first serious effort to make a collective commitment to democratic reforms ended Saturday before it began, with the host nation, Tunisia, insisting that it be postponed indefinitely.

In a statement, the Tunisian government said it felt that the commitment of Arab states toward reforms — from human rights to a greater role for women — was insufficient for the 22 foreign ministers gathered here to hammer out an agreement on common goals that the heads of state would endorse."

Super, a bit - no, rather suprising that they can't even get the facade together, that has been the whole purpose of Arab summits for the past fiftey years, to put a facade together while they busily stab each other in the back, and generally display some of the worst efforts at regional coordination of any given region in the world - this takes even the Africans for a ride.

Note "Some foreign ministers had refused to include certain words like "democracy" and "parliament" and "civil society," said Oussama Romdhani, an official spokesman for the Tunisian government. Officials who took part in the meeting said the very idea of supporting nongovernmental organizations as the building block for civil society had dragged on for four hours."

My money is, Egyptians on the last.

"Even by the erratic standards of Arab summit meetings, long marked by very public displays of anger and mutual insults, the sudden cancellation of the such an important gathering just before it was to begin seemed to come as a surprise."

This is wrong by the way, the public displays of pique are a welcome recent innovation, generally you had summits with all happy faces, and lots of documents that had a snowball's chance in hell of actually seeing anything vaguely resembling application. Like that infamous "Arab Free Trade Zone." Qadhdhafi's calling the Saudis stooges in the last one at least had an air of honesty and reality to it. Which is why the Egyptian cuts the broadcast. Actually that was a moment of rare entertainment, although I recall thinking that there was no way they'd let it go on for long.

And this is most amusing: "Most ministers were tight-lipped, refusing to even comment on a decision that they said had been made by Tunis in the absence of any consultation with them. Some rejected the idea that there had been no agreement on the various issues, saying the Tunisians seemed to have some unspecified reason of their own for wanting to cancel."

Super, at least we are seeing the reality of Arab politics now. And Israel sells these clowns as enemies. They can't even get their act together when they're bloody desperate and need some Potemkin response to the Americans. There's a good reason why Arab armies keep getting and will keep getting crushed by anyone with half a bit of discipline.

And then this note: "The Bush administration had made no secret of its desire for the meeting to end with a strong statement backing more open, democratic change in the Middle East. For Washington, an echo of democratic change across a region marked by autocratic governments would help justify the decision to go to war to topple Saddam Hussein.

But Washington got off on the wrong foot when its Middle East proposal, which laid out a blueprint it hoped the Arab states would follow, was leaked before any Arab leader was aware of its contents."

One diplomatic fuck up after another, and they still believe their idiotic ideas of "transformation" via Iraq, which is a complete fucking mess.

I await with increasing impatience for regime change in the US in the desperate hope that something approaching a clue will enter into American policy in regards to this region.

Also see this:
La Tunisie reporte sine die le sommet de la Ligue arabe
LEMONDE.FR | 28.03.04 | 11h23 • MIS A JOUR LE 28.03.04 | 17h22
http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3220,36-358717,0.html

Posted by The Lounsbury at 08:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

On the MENA Group Blog

First, let me say that I a bloody climbing the walls, as the drooling moronic incompetents (it was fun telling them this to their faces, if a bit mean) of the "leading" ISP (i.e. who has signed on more suckers than others), have knocked out my email - well everyone's email. These people are the most unreliable morons I have ever had to deal with in ISPs.

That aside, it looks as if a group blog on MENA is starting. I am not the moving force behind this, I may participate if the terms are right, and I like the idea.

I thought I might share here a comment I wrote at the sponsor's website:
"Well, I just found this after getting the note from von and drilling around the site.

Very interesting. And I may add tacitus gets me nod for the reference. While obviously we don't really get on in re a particular subject, and the turns of phrase in the above exchange are perhaps a bit unfortunate. I do respect the nod.

Otherwise, interesting concept, I toyed with it myself.

Last note, I will be happy to participate to the limit of my other commitments and in the context of a wide ranging discussion of the issues - I will say I am utterly uninterested in an exclusive focus on Islam and its problems (as well as "problems").

I might suggest, by the way, that a focus on the Middle East proper is a rather more reasonable focus - something covering the entire Islamic world per se is simply unwieldy.

As for names, well, if I may be so bold to suggest something like " ta'qqul " ~ " judiciousness, mutual understanding " or more amusingingly " 'aqoul " which means both " understanding, reasonableness " and is the name of a spiny bush - English name is 'Camel's Thorn.'

That rather amuses me actually. Hell, even if I do not participate, I encourage the last suggestion.

I hope they go with my suggestion. I like the play. Although perhaps it is most appropriate to me personally.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 05:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Iraq: Why Reconstruction is failing

Actual conversation with the head of private sector development (The Big Cheese, BC), my best recollection. Should be pretty close to the actual.

Me: "Touching base with you again regarding the contacts, people we need to speak with to move things forward."

BC: "Sorry you're catching me at a bad time, just got back and we're restructuring [again] our office." Adds something more about turnover.

Me: "No problem, but we're very eager to start pulling together the data in order to make this happen."

BC: "Absolutely, it is a great project and we want to see it happen if it is appropriate, but we're going through a lot of changes right now, we'll have you the information as soon as possible. [The Group] is never far from my mind."

Me: "Super, excellent, I am always glad to hear that, but you know we need to move hard. By the way, I have the [data source] on [SOE relevant] and I wanted to know if I can speak to the author, get a better sense of status and the like."

BC: "Which is that, I am not familiar"

Me: "The [data source] on the CPA website, you have to drill around to find it but it is there."

BC: "Oh, uh, well to tell the truth it's pretty likely they're not here any more."

Me: "I think it is pretty recent, just found it [date]"

BC: "Yeah, but there is no one here who has been here for more than six months."

Me: [Laugh good naturedly] "Right, I understand, major turnover. Is there any way I can get in touch? I mean it would be really key to understand from a first person perspective the issues here, to the extent it is appropriate."

BC: "Well, a lot of those people are just gone..."

Me: "Right, right. However, I have a name from [data source] might not be the real author, but [name] is identified, could be just a template author."

BC: "Yeah, yeah, I know [author], [author] was demobilized,[author] is back in the US, but I know [author]."

Me: "Great, is there any way I can speak to him?"

BC: "I can try, see if [author] is willing but generaly they are out of the loop now."

Me: "No one is there for more than six months?"

BC: "Yes"

[Get back to nitty gritty, promise to call back, etc.]

Bloody hell, no institutional memory, constant organizational chaos. This is the recipe for blowing through vast funds and doing nothing with them. Nothing truly productive except enriching the few well-placed con artists that can sell these guys an idea.

Hmm, wonder if that includes me? Hope not.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 04:37 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Delayed, so: On Iraq, Steel, Projects & CPA

Well, my man is dropping off his daughters (bloody family men...) so a moment regarding my conversation last night with a fellow working with CPA (sub-contract, indirect) regarding the opportunity. I've known him a while now, we have off the record convos, bit of checking in on each other.

First, he knows the folks who got whacked by the Iraqi police. As many of you know, the whackers were 100 percent bona fide Iraqi police. Added information on this, from my amigo, was they (the whackees) had made a stupid move of travelling late in the evening without a convoy or heavily armed escort. In Iraq, you do not go out after dark unless you're armed to the teeth and in armor. That's the rule. They, my amigo says, had a bit too much naive belief in "good work." Good work means nada in a guerilla war.

Harsh criticism from him - and he knew the folks - but a clear statement on the reality.

Second, commended my decision to go for the Morocco option, saying, "It's not getting any better anytime soon." Noted the briefings now are explicitely warning people coming in for contract work that even in conditions where you are armed and armored, you're looking at a good 10 percent chance, 2 out of 20, that you are going to get whacked. This is not happy stuff, he is not sure how much longer he can keep at it himself. Further, in his opinion, there are signs of the instability spreading. Hard to tell, but it is there. We agreed that for the Steel project to come off we're going to have to site it in the South. There's noother choice. The Kurdish areas are presently stable, but siting in the North runs a real risk that if Kurd/non-Kurd tensions go overboard - and there are signs of this already - a project sited in the North may end up cut off from the rest of the country.

South Central region might b e a choice, but question is can you relaibly get enough power off-take given sabotage, etc. Note, this is a serious concern, you can't make money on this thing if the bloody thing is down half the time from the power getting cut. Or in the alternative, you hve to build your own power plant to go with your project. It might have an added benefit in terms of co-gen and then off-sales to the grid for excess power, but that's a real gamble.

I had not really thought through the power issue before, so this was a useful convo.

The other issue raised of course was cost of security. Going rate for average security people, no great shakes, is now $1000/day. That is a serious bit of added overhead. Westerners of course, but the IRaqis can not be trusted. There is just not enough bandwidth to properly vet everyone, indeed in the choas, it is well nigh impossible to properly vet people. Of course, you can go the old fashioned way of depending on a "family" to set up something, but then you get into a shadowy set of circumstances. Avoidable? Don't know.

In any case, he noted that right now they are desperate for private activity to come in, because in general, except for Arab trading operations, there is no investment going on that is not driven by CPA itself. Almost everything is the ministries. This should get us leverage. But is it enough to get the kind of coverage that we need to make this work? I don't know, because the cost structure keeps looking more and more distroted. So far I have not had the sense the private sector investment team is realistic enough regarding what they can actually get happening in the prsent circumstances. Sucked down too much of that home brew called "Iraq is a startup opportunity" that they were pimping back last year.

Well, we'll all see as we try to move this project forward. Try.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 01:02 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

March 26, 2004

An Arab Editorial on Greater Middle East Initiative.

I thought this might be interesting to share, as I know the writer quite well:

Reforms are long overdue
By Tayseer Abdel Jaber


THOUGH THE American initiative calling for political, economic, social and cultural reforms in the “Greater Middle East” has not been officially formulated in a final forum, it has created a widespread response. At the official level, most Arab leaders declared that reform should be homegrown and adapt in form and speed to the historical developments and current conditions of each country and society. They refuse imposed reforms from outside and suspect their timing and reasoning.
At the individual level, many writers and columnists have expressed their opinions. They range from complete rejection to mild acceptance. Some question the motive and the choice of region, which is basically Muslim and includes all Arab countries. Others raised the valid point that previous American administrations cooperated with Middle Eastern and other governments in spite of some having out-of-date political, economic and social systems.

I believe that the debate has mixed many issues together. There are basic questions that should be raised and answered clearly. The first, and of utmost importance, is whether reform in our region is needed or not. Can we simply rely on the evolution that took place in the last two or three decades, if any, to continue or do we need more forceful and direct changes that bring this region in line with major countries and nations in the world?

My answer to this and related questions is that our region needs comprehensive reforms and fast. Reforms in all areas are long overdue. This has been strongly pointed out by many Arab intellectuals in different fora over the last three decades. Since the early 1980s, many meetings of the Arab Thought Forum have concluded that democracy in the Arab countries stands as a condition for real economic and political development and participation. Lack of it has led to apathy, tribalism, skewed economic development, massive poverty and unemployment, heavy-handed governments and brain drain.

Many economists pointed out, as early as the 1960s, and continue to do so, that the Arab regimes are missing a lot of potential economic progress due to the irrational restrictions they impose on the flow of people, goods and services, and capital. The Arab Economic Unity Agreement was reached in 1957, the same year of the Treaty of Rome. Look at the great disparity between the achievements of the European Union and the meagre ones of Arab integration!

The challenges facing individual Arab economic systems are immense and will not be settled in each country alone and in isolation. This situation is already not sustainable. It has spilled over to worsen the political and social conditions.

Are these conditions not known in each Arab country? Have they been discovered only in the last month? Haven't they been raised over and over again?

Another example was the Arab Thought Forum study of the education system in the Arab countries that was carried out two decades ago. It was clear in that study that there was wide room for urgent reform, but again the volumes of that study were shelved! Why awaken dormant problems?

The problem areas were very clearly defined even before the last two Arab Human Development Reports were issued in 2002 and 2003. The UNDP Human Development Report was first issued in 1990 and since then it has been published annually. It covers about 180 countries, including the Arab states. In each report, it is evident where the Arab states stand. Though they differ among themselves, as a group, and compared to other regions, they have the lowest participation of women in political life, the highest illiteracy rate, the highest spending on arms, the lowest economic growth, the least intra-regional trade, the lowest women participation in the labour force, and the list continues. Do we need reform or shall we wait for the conditions to get worse, to deteriorate more?

Should we be against reforms on the pretext that they come from the outside? Perhaps this nicety could be tackled by protocol people and diplomats, in order to make it partly homegrown. But most Arab countries, as well as others, do follow international developments and benefit from others experience. Moreover, all Arab countries that had to implement an economic adjustment programme had to accept economic and institutional reforms that were imposed by the IMF and the World Bank. They may be called “national economic reform”, but the fact remains that they are under the scrutiny of the international institutions which are controlled by major Western countries.

Another example can be taken from the accession to the WTO, which usually forces a country to amend and introduce many crucial economic and other legislations. Even the Association Agreements between each of the eight Arab countries and the European Union do include a political section which commits Arab countries to respect the United Nations Charter, human rights and democracy.

So, no country in the world closes its doors and windows against overdue reform proposals, especially when there has been a continuous flow of local demands for these reforms coming from inside the room. Reforms are top priority for our future and do not contradict our deep concerns for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Introducing reforms, regardless of their origin, might even strengthen our position worldwide, including our position against occupation.

The writer is a former minister and executive director of the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA). He contributed this article to The Jordan Times.

Monday, March 22, 2004

Posted by The Lounsbury at 11:13 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

MENA Business Media, sharing a memo I wrote

Thought I could share this memo I wrote for some peeps coming into the region for the first time. A favor to help them out. Lightly edited to remove references inapprop for public consumption. This is about English language or French language business and economic news sourcing for an expat staff. Threw in some Arabic lang. source refrences as well.

General Business News
Online:
First, for following daily developments I would advise following both the following:
MENAFN
http://www.menafn.com
and

MENA Report
http://www.menareport.com

Both provide economic and financial news feeds (for free) on the region

MENA Report is easier to navigate but less substantive. Hoever unlike MENAFN it does a fairly decent job of capturing the francophone press articles, which are key for Maghreb. However, this is only in French with limited translation. Let me emphasize that it is difficult to keep informed on the Maghreb through English sources, French sources are truly key.

Middle East Economic Survey
http://www.mees.com/
A weekly newsletter and competitor to MEED to an extent, it is more focused on oil and gas activities than MEED, but contains often useful financial and general economic / business coverage. Like MEED, tends to have a Gulf bias.

al-Hayat: online at daralhayat.com they have scoops on economic/business news in Arabic, inconsistently translated into English at their English site. Worth checking on a weekly basis. (http://english.daralhayat.com/) Note al-Hayat is a pan-Arab publication out of London and widely considered to be the prime quality paper in Arabic. The general news they translate is well worth reading.

Otherwise, I would note that BBC online has good business and social coverage of the Middle East and that one should consult al-Jazeera in English http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage.

Arabic Media:
I know this may not be practical, but I want to bring to your attention al-Iqtissad wal-Aamal. This is an Arabic language business monthly, which is jam packed with information. It is a hard read, but has a huge amount of information. Very Middle East versus North Africa focused. Local staff should be tasked to tracking this.

Also local staff should be tasked to follow CNBC Arabiyah, a new offering that is surprisingly good and the only really consistent focus on business and economic news on the Arab Sats, although al-Arabiyah (not the same as CNBC) is not bad.

Country Based News
Egypt:
Cairo Times
http://www.cairotimes.com/
A scrappy little publication, this contains largely political/local news, but often has interesting business / economic coverage. Widely read in the ExPat community.

Business Today
http://www.businesstoday-eg.com/
An English language Egyptian / Arab business news magazine. When I was in Cairo I thought it was decent, however the web page is down.

Al-Ahram Weekly
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/
The Egyptian government’s staid mouthpiece, English weekly edition.

Middle East Times
http://metimes.com/2K4/issue2004-12/methaus.htm
This English weekly paper aspires to a pan-Arab scope, but is largely Egyptian in focus, with Gulf and Sham for good measure, not much Maghreb matierals. Business, political and social coverage.

Jordan:

Jordan Times
http://www.jordantimes.com
The real sole online English source for Jordan. Keep in mind this is a government controlled paper, although not as tendentious as al-Ahram.

The Jordanian Embassy in Washington maintains a surprisingly well done news archive that largely reproduces Jordan Times articles, but also some others, such as The Star, a semi-independent weekly which is not online anymore.
http://www.jordanembassyus.org/new/newsarchive.shtml

Note, of course this is a selection with a “point of view” I have used this for roughly a year and found it relatively even handed – of course there is prior censorship in the Jordanian press which makes the selection itself limited.

MENAFN and MENA Report are both based in Jordan and by default give coverage on this.

Morocco:
L’Economiste
http://www.leconomiste.com/
A very good daily covering the Moroccan economy, business community. Also covers political events and the like. A scrappy and indispensable source. Takes the most classic liberal point of view of any of the Moroccan press, rather like The Economist. Indeed I would say it is the closest thing to a real newspaper that one can find in the country, somewhat close nevertheless to the Casa business elite.

La Vie Eco
http://www.lavieeco.com/index
A weekly competitor, not as good but useful to follow.

Economie & Entreprises
Not online but a very good monthly. Informative.

I do not know of any good English language sources in Morocco itself. Will follow up on the other request when I get a moment.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 09:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

March 25, 2004

On the Clarke testimony

I don't normally comment or speak to domestic politics regarding the US - in many ways I only care about foreign policy since I am hardly in the States - but I am fascinated by the firestorm regarding this fellow.

I am curious to know what the impact will be. I understand the political machinery is full attack on the fellow, but the reporting I read suggested that his public appearances have been strong.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 01:37 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

March 24, 2004

The Value of Reputational Capital

Lunch, with the CFO of my ex-Fund. Feel sorry for the poor bastard, really not a bad sort although he ... well let's say he did not stop bad things from happening although I am confident he was not a part of them.

We're talking about potential projects, discussing a business plan. He then starts spilling his guts about the present situation in the Fund. The Director, the theif as you may recall, has refused, utterly illegally of course, to pay him his termination of service indemnity. He's being kept hostage in a way.

His problem now is this news has gotten out, not news-wise but in informed circles. The reputation of the Fund in the market is now ... what it should be. This means he's all covered up in it, for all that at worst (which is actually not very good) he was an enabler through inaction of other's bad deeds.

This is the killer since right now, nobody will touch him. He's got potential liability and is associated with a Fund which potentially USG is going to go after. (Legal gears grinding) It's not good, because in addition, and unlike me, he does not have plausible deniability. Totally misplayed the situation. For me, the short term risk was I was seen as an asshole, disloyal, etc. Best pay off I have ever had from a decision and a real lesson in reputational capital, the value. Walking away, and denouncing a corrupt situation, and having the bad reputation with the right people has kept business and proposals coming my way. This guy is looking at potential personal bankruptcy and losing the house he just built. And he didn't even profit (at least in any substantial manner) from the disaster.

But in many ways his own fault. Had he come out cleanly at the right moment, he would have taken the up front hit, but gotten the aura of reformer and straight shooter. Now, he gets no payoff, and worse, rather penalty. Told me - and I thought the poor bastard was going to cry - that he is thinking of emmigrating, the situation is so bad.

Lesson: don't undervalue your rep, it has market value, and don't undervalue options stemming from what may see a risky move (denouncing the boss, even if there is an aspect of 'market timing' in the move).

He saw the costs, but failed to value the implicit option involved in the move.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 04:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

So, embassies closing, some fine blue APCs out today; prayers and financial crises.

Fun stuff.

It made me recall during the war when I was walking an American in from out of town through the financial district and we ran into a major demo. All the guys in blue camo were out, the blue APCs with the MGs and water cannons, fun stuff. I recall he asked me "Is this safe" and without thinking I replied, "Well, I don't smell any tear gas so it can't be that bad." I will never forget the look on his face. Really amusing, but he may be right, my standards of bad are getting warped.

And so, off again for lunch. Right next to the UN HQ here. Sure going to be fun.

Ah side note, from my convo with the CBoJ fellow yesterday. We had a fun conversation about the currency crisis in 1989, he was as I mentioned, the responsible official for the forex operations. The interesting point here was on prayer, they're in the midst of a currency crisis and he has staff disappearing for an hour "for prayers." Nice excuse, few are willing to challenge that given the political situation in the region. Our CBoJ fellow indicated he called staff in and asked them if they did Fajr (early am) prayer on time? Nobody did. So, he asks, in the midst of a currency crisis, you can't be late with your afternoon prayer or do it after work?

Excuses and exploitation of the religion for personal reasons.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 01:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

On Yassine, III

Machiavelli in the Middle East
By David Ignatius
Tuesday, March 23, 2004; Page A19
[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16411-2004Mar22.html[/url]

And select quotes:

""It is much safer to be feared than loved," wrote the philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli nearly 500 years ago. That harsh logic can be seen in Israel's assassination Monday of Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the leader of the terrorist group Hamas.

It follows that for Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, it's better to be seen as ruthless than as weak. .... "The message that Israel sent out by assassinating Sheik Ahmed Yassin is that when the disengagement from Gaza is finally implemented, Hamas will not be able to claim that the withdrawal was promoted by the group's operations.""

I may add that the assertion, from an Israeli security commentator, is frankly utterly without logic. Hamas will certainly still claim - and with perhaps some justification - that their Lebanon strategy worked, and that for this the Israelis are lashing out at them. Indeed, by taking this action, Israel has simply affirmed how important Hamas is to the very people who they are trying to convince otherwise.

As I noted prior, Sharon's strategy has a shown a brilliance in achieving exactely the opposite effect desired.

Ingatius notes: "But even Machiavelli believed that intimidation has its limits. Just a few sentences after the famous passage quoted above, he cautioned: "Nevertheless a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred."

By that Machiavellian measure, Sharon has failed. An enraged Hamas has vowed new suicide bombings in retaliation, and governments across the Middle East and Europe issued statements on Monday condemning Israel. "It's unacceptable, it's unjustified and it's very unlikely to achieve its objective," said British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. "

Indeed, when fear turns to hatred, one achieves the opposite of the desired effect.

The further question is:
" But will the Israeli operation work? That's the question a modern Machiavelli would ask. ... But even by this test, the assassination seems unlikely to achieve its intended result.

A pragmatic critique came from Sharon's own interior minister, Avraham Poraz. He explained Monday to Israeli reporters why he voted against the operation in a secret cabinet meeting: "I'm afraid that Hamas's motivation will increase. [Yassin] will become some sort of martyr . . . a national hero for them, and, I'm sorry to say, this won't prevent Hamas from continuing its activities.""

Bingo.

"Killing the partially blind and paralyzed Yassin "will only reignite and re-energize Hamas," agreed Daoud Kuttab, a prominent Palestinian journalist. ... And how does Israel imagine that Gaza will be governed once it pulls out? Before the Yassin assassination, Egypt had signaled a willingness to help with security. And Yasser Arafat's Palestinian Authority had drawn up plans (with the tacit approval of Yassin) for restoring law and order after the Israeli army leaves. Both efforts may now collapse in the uproar over Yassin's death. It's hard to see how Israel will benefit from the resulting anarchy."

However it is easy to see Hamas benefitting. Incorruptible, motivated cadres, the motivation of combined "holy" and nationalistic fervor that was clearly evident in watching the Sats covering the demos. Hamas flags everywhere.

Hamas is the clear winner. And the cadres, they can replace the leadership. It is a modern organization in many respects, more so than the archiac and corrupt PA organizations.

Finally the article closes on this:
" ... there is a deeper issue, one that goes to the heart of Israel's dilemma in dealing with the Arabs. Sharon symbolizes the belief that the Palestinians can be intimidated by military force -- and that peace will be possible only when they are sufficiently weakened and humbled. If Israel is tough enough, by this logic, it will eventually break the Arabs' will and force them to accept Israel's right to exist.

That rationale sent Israeli tanks rolling into Lebanon 22 years ago, in an operation Sharon believed would break the PLO and open the way to peace. But it didn't work out that way, and many Israelis now agree that the Lebanon war was a costly failure."

Further..." they [Israel] should consider the evidence of more than two decades that Sharon's approach isn't working. Rather than being humbled into submission, the Palestinians have embraced a strategy of suicidal rage."

The question is what exit from nihilistic violence? I rather think the author is wrong in suggesting Machiavelli was wrong, it is safer for Israel to be feared, but not to be hated with a suicidal rage - for that only begats unending terror for there is no defeating short of genocide an enemy who cares not if he dies in taking you with him.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 02:58 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Conversations, Jordanian Central Banker

Recently retired former Deputy G, speaking to him about a project, went to his house this evening for a late dinner.

We had an interesting conversation, wide ranging. Of note, his opinion that the recent events have really touched off a negative wave, and felt it could be rather like Sharon's visit to the Haram of the Dome of the Rock in terms of setting off a new round of degragation in conditions.

Otherwise, we spoke about currency policy - turns out this fellow managed the forex operations of the CB during the 1989 meltdown. Chalabi's little thing. Interesting convo there, but that I won't touch. Had some amusing thoughts to share on the Egyptians and their staggeringly mismanaged float of the pound. As he said, they have done it in a way that they have managed to take no benefit from it (floating the pound), nor any benefit from their actions to manage (the float). The funny thing about this is the current Gov of CB Egypt was his professor back in the day - the fellow is operating exactely contrary to what he taught, my man says.

That's Egypt. Say one thing in private, do and say another in public, wallow in incoherence.

Spoke a long time on democracization. Both agreed that there is a popular desire for more open systems, although people do not, understandably, have a good sense of what this means. But there is widespread sense that the old systems have failed, new are needed. However, he noted that the way the reforms are being pushed by the Administration is causing people to say no because of their pride, feelings. He himself is quite pro-American, but things need to be done better. Also shared that he feels the American embassies are very poorly served by their staff - focus on people who speak English well, but not on those who know the country, they get local foreigners - poor langauge skills, poor intelligence (economic).

Have to say, I agree.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 02:48 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

March 22, 2004

Arab Media - Yassine

Well things are in over drive. People are ... well climbing the walls over this. The imagery of a blown apart wheel chair, and in particular al-Jazeerah's gruesome imagery of a crippled old man (Yassine) blow to pieces - in all gory directness - is pushing buttons. The US response of course is utterly tone deaf, and plays into the agitprop that the US is doing the bidding of Israel.

In paricular al-Jazeerah is now Yassine 24/7, al-Arabiyah is far better. However, the reality is that al-Jazeerah is responding to market interest. Lots of imagery of Yassine being wheeled around, blind old crippled man. Not good PR, as I noted prior even Xian Arabs I have spoken to find the assassination of Yassine offensive, for all that they have little love for his Islamist supremacist politics. Plays into the feeling that Arab lives mean nothing, are always excused in their death.

This is truly an ugly day and I am certainly going to have to keep a low profile. Luckily deVillepin had some nice comments today, I'll cop to being French.

However, the reality is this was an incredibly idiotic move, unless of course the purpose was to uttelry sink the peace process and futher play into the Bush Administration's simplism and sell them on I-P Conflict = Supporting Israel & in particular Sharonista policies as part of the "War on Terror." Nihilistic politics, this, but I have a hard time seeing how this is helpful otherwise.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 07:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

On the assassination of Cheikh Yassine

On the assassination of Cheikh Yassine

Well, it’s a bloody disaster and it’s incredibly stupid.

I have to say the logic of assassinating him escapes me. An old decrepit man, religious leader, saintly pose and looks – of course he’s a bloody minded bastard as well – who really has no effective control, although does do some egging – lots of egging – on in terms of violence. An old man in a wheelchair. That is not good PR.

Killing him achieved what?

Well, it achieved martyrdom for him, and helped reinforce the Hamas agitprop regarding the Israelis.

It will feed into a wave of anger – not just among Muslims, the Xian Arabs I have spoken to today consider the assassination criminal as well, like it or not the man was viewed as a real religious personage – and clearly feed into further attacks on Israel.

It will certainly help Hamas in recruiting, it will almost as certainly help the Islamic militants arguments against Israel and help their recruiting.

It will do nothing to operationally damage Hamas.

So, in one fell stroke the Israeli government has (a) stoked anger to fevered heights, (b) fed radicalism, (c) created a new “martyr,” (d) done nothing to address the underlying problems or in fact operationally damaged Hamas.

This senseless policy of violence for the sake of, well, it appears simple revenge is not going to lead to a way out. I am truly amazed that the Sharon government can continue in this nihilistic spiral into disaster.

On the other hand, I rather believe that they are trying to set up the circumstances by which the Sharonista dream of ethnic cleansing can come to pass. It’s the only thing that makes sense in this context.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 01:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

March 21, 2004

Conundrums and Steel, Iraq and Investment.

Well, finally some movement from the bureaucrats on this Iraqi steel project, have to rap with the chief of private sector investment with CPA - took him a bloody long time to get back to me, but suddenly they're seeing value. Of course maybe those assasinations are helpful, the investors still willing to deal with this situation are getting fewer.

The odd part of this situation is that the Left in American think that Iraq is a great deal for folks like me - on the contrary it's a fucking shitty situation and people like me are not, contra the stereotype, very much supportove of war for commercial purposes. It's getting thigns ass backwards to think the Bush Administration did the war for crass commercial reasons. Quite the contrary, they very much believed their own stories. However, nothing wrong with getting some good business out of the true believers at the same time.

This aside, I'll share another item, came in regards to the Iraq situation and my plans. I was rapping with my amigo, the CEO of MENAFN.com about choices (and ideas for vulture funds, etc) when I spoke to the Iraq situation. It's just crap and getting crappier. My amigo - well we're really not that close, in fact we almost hate eachother, but have similar business views, so money before personal preferences - tells me about a recent convo he had at the Embassy with some CPA folks. One of the fellows, and I quote the reporting of my amigo, said "I probably shouldn't say this, but don't go [to Iraq], it's just not safe."

This is becoming something of a farce - we have happy talk to make the pre-fooled happy nd all warm and tingly inside for the upcoming political season, and then we have the reality. And for the political issues, the CPA-Iraq admin can't speak to reality, and we have continued infighting that has more or less frozen efforts. Bloody hell, I was asked to look into putting together a leasing consortium for Iraq in January - I poke around for the USG types, get interest, try to take it further. Suddenly there is a turf war and no action. The bloody problem of course is that no one is really convinced of this idiotic game, and there is no cleear ownership of decisions outside the political types. I drop the subject because I am not going to expend my personal capital, reputational or otherwise, on trying to get something going to solve their problem (That KBR and Halliburton do not want to take on any more risk in extending contracts to small Iraqi operators, and that the financial system is still entirely dysfunctional) when they seem incapable of realistic follow through. There is still this absurdist point of a view among too many there that investment capital is going to flow into Iraq, and they just need to ... well I don't know what they think they should be doing. Bloody preparing bloody USTDA financing for Telecoms and IT investments, wehn there is not enough electicity and basic services are desperately in need of investments. It's a farce. Well, to be fair, that USTDA financing earmark was congressional. My USTDA contacts actually seemed to be chagrined. The amount of irrealism in the US regarding this whole affair is really staggering. No wonder the American Administration is such a farce. The Brits have better ideas, but then what can I say, a bit of experience in the real world.

Otherwise, regarding the conundrum II
I sometimes wonder about myself. I spent much of my weekend designing a three year budget for personal affaires for the potential new job in North Africa with various scenarios for dollar depreciation and regional currency responses.

And I enjoyed it. Yes, in place of fun, I spent my weekend with Excel playing around with scenarios. I have to say that if my expectation of a 20-30 percent depreciation over the next two years carries through, and the currency basket in Morocco is not adjusted, I am going to be unhappy. Of course, this is all simply ammunition for negotiations, but if I am not hedged, I get a very annoying exposure to currency fluctuations through rent versus housing allowance. If they don’t come up on the offer, they need to give me a currency flexible housing allowance, else it goes from being a very decent one to crap.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 11:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

March 18, 2004

Regulation and Government: The Evils of Regulation (Developing World)

Now, most people reading here know I am not a knee-jerk, market solves everything type. My experience in the Pharma industry taught me that regulation helps make markets when done right. Confidence in products, reduced costs in terms assurance on one level (against higher costs of meeting regulations, a good cost-benefit analysis has to recognize that an unregulated market has implicit costs in reassuring consumers of quality, in the case of health related / life or death products, I feel these may be substantial if we price in lost market size, etc.).

Nevertheless, this caveat, if done right, is key.

It's a point the ninny hammered "fair trade" advocates rather avoid or abstract away from. However, in the developing world - let me say the Arab region instead, where one can rarely count on any kind of administrative efficiency, let alone clarity, this is a very dangerous assumption. Public good, and all that, are not in fact, if we take reality and not the pious pronouncements made for Western consumption, in any way governing ideas. No, Administration in this region is almost always all about protecting or extracting rents.

Perfect example today. I have a close friend starting up a IT Security and related services consulting house. A necessary service given the truly awful security on networks here, general lack of consciousness regarding IT security issues and the new international pressure on key institutions such as in the financial sector to clean up their act and institute better overall practices, including security - internal as well as external.

Now this fellow's practice is defined (I am not sure if this makes sene business-wise but it's his planning so let's not be too critical) widely to include physical security applications leveraging IT - or higher technology as well.

Two stories to cover this.

First, he brought in a network security appliance that allows one to run dedicated scans of a network for both internal and external (internet, etc) manipulations, weakpoints, etc. Perfect for a bank, for example. Brought this in as a sample. Now, under customs law, the sample should be duty free. However, unilaterally the customs department decided to impose some 'special duty' for 'security reasons' since the machine had 'security implications' and could be 'abused.' Regulation became an excuse to extort a 100 percent duty on the assessed value of the machine. Or pehraps get a bribe. Now, this could be challenged, of course, with a lawyer, but given administrative lenteur, legal costs, one could easily exceed the duty, and in the meantime, customs holds your sample hostage.

Rent seeking.

Worse, today the fellow rings me up, he's livid.

Among the projects he has is to do the full security set up at a new foreign exchange trading house opening up. This runs from IT security to internal physical security. Now he's proposed to them installing wireless IP cameras at stations, etc. to provide a monitoring system. I am not sure that this is in fact a good idea, the wireless part, or even necesary but the principals appear to have desired to have extensive camera monitoring of the site, including the stations. Good idea, bad idea, let's abstract away from this.

Today the administration, again using its security powers, issued a decree declaring wirless cameras to be a security and public threat, and siezed the stock of his employer. No advance notice, no clear explanations, except some kind of strangely incoherent appeal to regulatory authority. Real issue, competition. Again there are avenues to challenge this, but the space for administrative fiat in regulation, for pure and simple manipulation to protect monopoloy rents for connected traders, etc. is immense.

In the developing world, until national institutions take on a life of their own, and good governance at some level is instilled as a general value, a libertarian attitude towards government is well-warrented as government in the developing world, in the Arab world is less about the public than about protecting the rents of the elite. It is indeed the dead hand and dead weight loss of the most extreme libertarian visions.

I might add that I am sure my amigo has no better avalues than the guys who fucked him. Pity that.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 08:35 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Shia visit: ref via Juan Cole, Shia Chat

A rather well-written and moving recounting of a Brit Iraqi-Shia Ashoura visit, and particularly relavatory re conditions:
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=27124

Posted by The Lounsbury at 03:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

March 17, 2004

Spain - Elections - al-Qaeda and Reaction, Open Question for Readers

Boo Foo Foo noted the rather knee-jerk and poorly informed reaction among American conservatives in re the Spanish results.

I replied as follows:
I am aware of the idiocy in this connexion, sad because there is a legitimate question regarding appearances. That is, for all that I absolutely understood that the result was anger re the ETA claims more than any other factor, it will be spun among the al-Qaeda types as a victory. How does one respond to that?

Emphasis added.

The issue then being, while I think the charges of cowardice regarding Spain are ignorant, self-indulgent navel gazing of the meanest and most pitible kind, there is a legitimate issue of appearances - perception and spin on the side of al-Qaeda. I do think the Spanish government needs to address this angle, but how in particular is another matter. Perhaps a clear statement of principle in re Iraq, and one that makes it clear the decision regards the failure of reconstruction rather than a reaction.

However, is this appropriate?

Posted by The Lounsbury at 11:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Positive Results on Spanish Withdrawal Threats

I believe I can foresee some positive things coming from the Spanish threat to withdraw (joined by the Hondurans, perhaps others as the secutiry situation continues as it is now) from Iraq unless changes are made in the occupation.

First, it appears that the Bush Administration feels real pressure, given the withdrawals will, if they occur, occur not too far ahead of elections, and that they will, at minimum create the appearance of a collapsing coalition.

Second, it appears that under this percieved pressure there is talk of revamping. If, and this remains a very large if, the Spanish threat, joined by others especially, forces the Bush Adminstration to abandon its increasingly self-indulgent (electorally) and bankrupt approach to the administration of Iraq, then that will be a good thing. Indeed, it may help rescue Iraq from becoming a failed state, as it is well on its way to doing now.

If that is the case, that is the Spanish pressure proves to be leverage for changing the increasingly absurdly inappropriate CPA admin, then we have a net gain and indeed something that helps get policy on track to actually reduce terror.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 03:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Iraq, more assasinations

2 Engineers Killed in Iraq in Latest Attack on Foreigners
By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN
Published: March 17, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/17/international/middleeast/17IRAQ.html

Inevitable, emergence of assasinations of CPA support staff. N.b. it is particularly discouraging that even the "Green Zone" is subject to violence - recall the stabbing in the Zone of an American military officer (or soldier) a few days back. Culprit not caught. That means Iraq assistance from within.

It suggests the CPA really has few real friends at all.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 09:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

maroc, demos

I note that I am led to understand by Moroccan amigos that there were important solidarity demos in Morocco in re Spain.

Shall seek reporting on this.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 12:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

11 Sep and the jordan upblic, extract from a convo with the director of Jordanian TV

I am not going to share the entire conversation, which nevertheless was very interesting indeed. Rather, a side conversation on 11 Sep.

N. D., outgoing director of Jordanian TV opined, while we were dicussing various items regarding a project I have been working on, on the reaction to 11 Sep.

As readers from SDMB will recall, I was in the States at the time. In fact I was ... too close to the actuall events, having flown from NY to DC a day or two before, and having been across the river from the Pentagon that day. I recall it well. That entire day, I recall it well. My ex-wife worked in the towers. Well, neither here nor there, that.

Leaving that aside, I found N.D.'s commentary interesting, and it puts in context some of the worst imagery or information one has.

ND indicated that in the first 24-48 hours many Palestinians rejoiced, for they saw only the symbolism in the American (government) getting its cuppence. Then the imagery of the suffering, the horror, the awfulness began to be reported. At this point, opinion turned, from support, to revulsion, to rejection of the event as non-islamic, etc. Included in this was even the radicals who turned away from the bloodimindedness when shown the real results.

Two observations here. First, ND's characterization, which I found credible, suggest that theliack of a free media impeded the Jordanina - Palestinian population from arriving at the "human" conclusion regarding the horror.

I recall, I may add, that the Moroccan press at the same time - recall that I had just returned from an assignment in Morocco, my last with my old Pharma employer- was rather clearer.

Regardless, I found his characterization interesting, illuminating.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 12:27 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

March 16, 2004

A little bit of everything: op survey sponsored by BBC in Iraq

Very interesting document (PDF)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/15_03_04_iraqsurvey.pdf

Take some digesting. It's all over the place.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 12:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Regarding my judgement on Madrid operators

I believe the linked article is of interest in the context of my earlier analysis that the likely Madrid operators were in fact not directly linked to al-Qaeda, and this is of real operational interest.

Similar Tactics, Different Names
Al Qaeda-Like Groups Scrutinized
By Dana Priest and Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, March 16, 2004; Page A16

"U.S. and European counterterrorism officials have seen a growing number of clues in the Madrid bombings that point to terrorists from any one of dozens of Islamic jihadist groups that use tactics similar to al Qaeda's but conduct operations and choose targets independently, the officials said yesterday"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61664-2004Mar15.html

Posted by The Lounsbury at 12:09 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

March 15, 2004

On the Spanish election, a thought or two

How to put this in context? I have been reading accusations that the Spanish have caved to terrorism by supporting a government that wants to get out of Iraq.

Some thoughts on this: the Spanish overwhelmingly opposed the war, and the presence of troops in Iraq. The bombings themselves did nothing to shift that. What the bombings evidently did do was refocus the electorate on foreign policy versus domestic policy, and perhaps also reignite anger over a FP that was overwhelmingly rejected in Spain. Noting this, I note that this is neither to characterize the popular opposition to the Iraqi war and occupation as right or wrong, these are simply political facts.

Now, it is unclear if the loss of the PP is more tied to its perceived attempt to dupe the electoral (I note that my sense is that the PP jumped on the ETA connexion because they sincerely believed it and doubt that there was a deliberate cover-up) just before the vote, or actual opposition to Iraq per se (itself strong) or perhaps feeling sold down the river regarding FP by the PP. Given popular anger over these items, as seen in the turn around, it is unsurprising the Socialists won.

Now there is a real problem in terms of perception here.

On one hand, even pre-elections, there was popular support for ending the PP's deeply unpopular pro-Bush Admin. FP in re the Middle East. That is, there seems to have been clear popular support for pulling out of Iraq, little popular support for remaining. However, pre-attacks, focus was on other, domestic issues, such as PP's ETA policy and economics (PP being uncompromising on ETA - hardly then an indication the Spanish electorate are wusses, to use a phrase so popular in certain quarters).

Having won, apparently on revulsion for perceived manipulation by the PP regarding the attacks, should the Spanish then engage in double think about their pre-existing desire to get out of Iraq? Perhaps, certainly in many quarters withdrawing from Iraq will be seen as caving in to al-Qaeda, although analytically it's not insofar as the desire was pre-existing.

Yet perceptions matter. On the other hand, can one make one's policy making prisoner to trying to double think what one thinks the "terrorists" or opponents etc. are thinking? It would seem perverse for the Spanish to decide at present that although they were strongly against their presence in the "Coalition of the Willing" that they should remain simply out of spite for the perception they might be seen as weak.

It strikes me that perhaps there is a false dilemma here, for it is possible for the new Spanish government to construct a policy response that affirms a continued commitment to fighting terror, but rejects continued participation in the present Iraqi fiasco - indeed something the PS has suggested in emphasizing, as I understand it, it would participate in a truly multinational effort in Iraq.

Nevertheless, a strange moment.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 03:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

March 14, 2004

Interesting al-Arabiyah interview

Interview with an Egyptian commentator on the Alexandria conference, Ahmed al-Mousalmaneh. Among the important statements, "Every side in the Arab world, Muslim Brothers, the Left, agree on 90 percent of [the reform proposals - i.e. the American proposal re democracy.]" Interesting set of comments that American pressure is less important than internal agreement on the need for change. Pity I am too tired to make a proper resume.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 10:56 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Madrid: Returns, early polls

Indicate Aznar's party has fallen in a stark reversal of fortunes.

Oddly I rather think the coverup accusations were overdone.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 09:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Excellent analysis by Ignatius re Reform and Engagement in MENA region

David Ignatius has used contact with Fadlallah, a Hizbullah leader in the past for insights, in this particular article from Friday he does so with great effect.

I note that my own on the ground experience rather supports the thesis here

Real Arab Reform
By David Ignatius
Friday, March 12, 2004; Page A23
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51888-2004Mar11.html

BEIRUT -- The Bush administration's new initiative to encourage democracy and reform in the Arab world has all the solidity of a hot-air balloon. It's floating grandly toward Planet Arabia, while down below the people who would be affected by it are variously taking potshots, running for cover or scratching their heads in confusion.

Well this may be somewhat unfair, I am not sure the 'initiative' has actually taken off at all.

The next paragraph I believe is precisely on point:
Are we really going to make this mistake again? To state what should be obvious after the reversals of the past year in Iraq: The idea of Arab democracy is meaningless unless it begins at home, driven by an Arab agenda for change, rather than by outsiders. If it's seen as another attempt to impose the West's agenda, then the planned U.S.-European Greater Middle East Initiative will fail -- and deservedly so.

I am not sure deservedly so, but yes, it will fail.

Somewhat further on, Ignatius notes: "A starting point for me is listening to the leading Shiite cleric in Lebanon, Sheik Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah. He can hardly be accused of pro-American sympathies; he was the spiritual leader of the Hezbollah fighters whose suicide bombs drove U.S. troops from Lebanon in 1984. But he's become a surprisingly progressive thinker and was one of the first Muslim clerics to condemn unambiguously the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001."

Ignatius notes he has had conversations with Fadlullah over two years, with the intro of Jamil Mroue, of the Beiruit English daily, The Daily Star, and quotes Fadlullah's support for reform ("suprising")...""We have always emphasized that governments in this part of the world are obsessed with power, and thus have kept their citizens under strict control," Fadlallah said, speaking through an interpreter. He cited two kinds of bad governance in the Arab world: the "tribal or dynastic families, who behave as if they have some divine right to conduct business," and "governments that have a fig leaf of legitimacy, in the form of ballots that produce 99.9 percent results.""

Quite right, that, and I think exactly what I have argued, as well as exactly the situation that breeds the Egypts of the region, including if we are lucky, Egypt on the Euphrates. Sadly, of course, the other choice seems to be civil war.

Now I found the following to be surprising, for its frankness and I think accuracy: "Fadlallah noted that these undemocratic governments have stayed in power partly because "they are part of a web of international interests" -- meaning that they serve the interests of the United States and its allies. But he cautioned: "It is not fair or accurate to lay all the blame for this deformed political process on the shoulders of the West. There are really serious internal reasons as well for this underdevelopment.""

Very fair.

He further adds: "The failed Arab regimes survive, Fadlallah said, thanks partly to the "excuse" of the Arab-Israeli conflict. "We have emergency laws; we have control by the security agencies; we have stagnation of opposition parties; we have the appropriation of political rights -- all this in the name of the Arab-Israeli conflict." He argued that resolving the Arab-Israeli problem was a necessary component of any serious Middle East initiative -- not just because it was right but because it would take away the props that support bad governance."

I absolutely agree there.

Now Ignatius argues that "...you'd hear pretty much the same opinion everywhere in the Arab world. People are sick of political and economic underdevelopment, and they want change. But they want to make it for themselves." which I think is a bit overstated, or rather I agree but with the caveat that the habit of laying blame on external forces is deep seated in Arab society such that you frequently get a highly mixed set of opinions - matter of face saving soemtimes more than real opinion.

Now, further on, Ignatius states or argues rather "The Bush administration hopes to present its plans at the G-8 summit in June, so there's still time to get it right. Above all, the United States and its European allies should avoid the mistake of assuming that just because people hate the regime they're living under, they will embrace an American-led effort to transform it. They won't, as the Iraqi experience sadly shows."

Precisely the case, emphasis added by the way.

I don't know that there is any way for the Bush Administration to get this right. Their underlying credibility is badly damaged by the incompetence of the Iraq occupation, the faux peace plan in the name of the "Road Map" - no important when it was needed for the political moment, but dropped like a hot potato afterwards. However, the underlying point regarding reform that the people own rather than imposed with an air of snotty superiority is the only way to actually achieve something.

How to enable that, of course, is an open question - although I would say having some credibility as a fair broker would be good.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 10:05 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

On terror and the present environment.

Sparked by Madrid and by the recent news regarding the kidnapping plot (initially reported in Arabic as focusing on "investors," then on "Jordanian businessmen" - involving Kuwaiti nationals and coming hard on the heels of a special warning from the US Embassy, I believe the plot probably actually involved kidnapping foreigners, Americans perhaps.), I have been thinking about the degrading political situation here in the Middle East.

First, as I have noted in passing in the past few weeks, I am hearing, from normally pro-American people (and recall of the upper classes) incredibly bitter and angry comments about American policy in the region. The long hangover from the Iraq war continues, and the ongoing violence there, the lack of real progress (not absurd abstract benchmarks but provision of security and stability for the population) and the similar ongoing degradation of the Israeli-Palestinian situation continue to feed anger.

I believe this has begun to enter a dangerous phase and I am becoming concerned that the damage to US interests is becoming substantial.

Further, it strikes me that the thesis that the Iraq war, besides being a waste of resources chasing after a chimera, has damaged the struggle against radical islamist terror - generally al-Qaeda - has to be seen as essentially confirmed.

I draw attention to this article in Le Monde Pour les responsables américains du renseignement, les capacités d'Al-Qaida restent considérables
http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3214,36-356590,0.html, the title translating as "For American intelligence officials, the capacities of al-Qaeda remain considerable" as the article says, even after two years of intense efforts. I add this Figaro article of interest for its resume - not news but a fine resume of the realities as it were: L'implication de la mouvance islamiste dans les attentats de Madrid signifierait sa réorganisation en profondeur
Le spectre d'une réorganisation d'al-Qaidahttp://www.lefigaro.fr/international/20040313.FIG0172.html

Regarding the Iraqi situation, Juan Cole has several chilling notes summarizing local and international reporting:
Wave of Killings at Sunni Mosques (http://www.juancole.com/2004_03_01_juancole_archive.html#107915995041289156) and
Shiite Crowds, Preachers, Denounce Interim Constitution (http://www.juancole.com/2004_03_01_juancole_archive.html#107915675400101628).

On the second item, Cole summarizes as follows: "In general, the Shiite mosque preachers didn't seem to like it very much. The comparisons of it to the Balfour Declaration and the suspicion that it was "written by the Jews" invokes the fate of the other main Arab population living under occupation, the Palestinians, whom the Israelis have robbed of their civil liberties and much of their land. It is an inaccurate description of the Coalition intentions, but it may well be effective in street protests. "

The last sentance being key.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 09:12 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004