False Dichotomies

“What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such; that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalisation of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.” Francis Fukuyama, The End of History

Eastern Europe has been forgotten by the world. The Berlin Wall fell, Communism was defeated, and the last great ideological battle in world history was over. Now, we could just settle back and watch the whole planet embrace liberal democracy and the free market. That was the basic thesis behind Francis Fukuyama’s much-maligned The End of History. I was reminded of this while walking through the labyrinth of grimy little shops that sit underneath the gargantuan Warszawa Centralna Station, where I saw Fukuyama’s work displayed prominently in one of the book-stores. Continue Reading »

Over the last few weeks, I have been to various Israel/Palestine debates. Firstly, I heard Daniel Reisner, Israel’s chief negotiator during the Oslo and Camp David years. He was due to debate with Ghaith Al-Omari, Assistant Chief of Staff to Palestinian President Abbas, but he unfortunately had to cancel. Earlier this week, there was a debate between Roey Gilad and Husam Zomlot, representatives of the Israeli and Palestinian embassies respectively. The quality of the debate was very poor, with both sides preferring irrelevant ahistoricism to substantive issues. This was reflected in the questions afterwards, with a ‘pro-Israeli’ member of the audience asking about Joan Peters’ debunked book From Time Immemorial, and a ‘pro-Palestinian’ asking the ‘Zionist’ how he felt representing the only racist country in the world. How very constructive. And a couple of days ago, I attended one of the best Israeli-Palestinian conversations I have ever heard. It was conducted between Yair Hirschfeld, an important figure behind the Oslo accords, and Ahmad Khalili, an adviser to President Abbas. Both speakers were excellent, particularly Khalili, who gave one of the clearest and most eloquent expositions of the Palestinian position you could ever wish to hear. Continue Reading »

“We know as a law of physics that heat is the chief, if not the only source of light. Reducing the son to room temperature would decrease light to nothing at all, as well as generating a definite chill. The truth cannot lie, but if it could, it would lie somewhere in between. On some grave questions, there is no difference to be split; one does not look for a synthesis between verity and falsehood; the sun does not rise in the east one day and in the west the next.” Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

There is a widely held misconception that ‘moderation’ denotes the best course of action to take. Politically, we are told that moderates occupy the centre ground. In other words, if we look to the ‘extremes’, and then measure the median point between them, we will find enlightenment. Ariel Sharon understands this all too well, and his decision to form a new party, tentatively titled ‘National Responsibility’, completes an astounding rehabilitation in his reputation. There is a danger, however, that this transformation (and, make no mistake, it is a transformation) should prove all too seductive. Continue Reading »

His victory has invigorated people thousands of miles away. We went to bed assuming that the dour has-been Shimon Peres would sneak victory again, consigning Israel for another interminable period of rule with no direction, and no real alternative. The next morning, the standard click onto the Haaretz website was transformed into a shot in the arm. The veteran Histradut leader Peretz, whose name Uri Avnery cutely reads as ‘breakthrough’, had won against all the odds. While many people could picture the image of this firebrand Sephardi with his magnificent moustache, in truth, we did not know much about him.
Continue Reading »

It did not make pretty reading. The Guardian headline, in however limited a way, surely summed up the astonishment a lot of us felt: “Not guilty. The Israeli captain who put 17 bullets into a Palestinian schoolgirl.” In October 2004, during IDF operations in Rafah (Gaza Strip), Captain ‘R’ (he cannot be named for legal reasons) found himself in a quandary. A 13 year-old Palestinian girl, Iman al-Hams, had crossed into a closed military zone carrying her school-bag. By the soldiers’ account, she was “scared to death.” Of course, they could not be sure that she posed no threat. Her bag could have held a bomb. Thus, they opened fire. Iman, in collapsing to the ground, dropped the bag, which was also riddled with bullets. The soldiers could now clearly see that it did not contain any explosives. Captain ‘R’ then stepped forward, infamously, to ‘confirm the kill’. His explanation was simple: “This is commander. Anything that’s mobile, that moves in the [security] zone, even if it’s a three-year old, needs to be killed.”

Continue Reading »

A couple of hours ago, the Students’ Union here at Cambridge voted to renew the ‘No Platform’ policy. Essentially, this motion means that the Students’ Union will not give a forum to racist organisations such as the BNP, Al-Muhajaroun and Hizb-ut-Tahrir. Opposition to the motion focused on the issue of freedom of speech. This is a misconception. The motion does not suppress freedom of speech. A Students’ Union constitutes an individual organisation, and organisations have every right to decide who they invite to participate in their activities. A Marxist organisation would not invite a Fascist to speak, an Orthodox synagogue would not invite a heretic, and a hip-hop club would not invite a classical musician. Ergo, a Students’ Union should not feel compelled to give a platform to groups which openly preach hatred and violence against its members.

Continue Reading »