Dubya and the shoe taboo

Published
by
Tom Chatfield
on December 16, 2008
in Foreign affairs, Uncategorized and United States
. 1 Comment
You could take a lot of cheap shots with these…

You could take a lot of cheap shots with these…

Strange happenings in Baghdad, as the outgoing Dubya suffers “the worst insult in the Arab world”—assault by footwear. The foot being the lowest part of the body, this is as bad as it gets, apparently; it takes me back to a cheerful montage of images from Iraq in 2003, when Iraqis seemed to be queuing up to rub the soles of their shoes against portraits of the vanquished Saddam. Now every journalist and blogger can polish up their pearl of wisdom one more time and explain, pace Wikipedia, just how profound the contempt this gesture indicates is.

I’m interested, though, in a rather more pragmatic question: just how effective is it to insult someone in an alien cultural idiom? Bush, naturally enough, looked bewildered, but he ducked speedily and seemed none the worse for wear afterwards. Gordon Brown, I suspect, would have stolidly absorbed the blows; Obama would probably have caught one shoe in each hand before throwing them across the room for three points into a waiting waste-paper basket. But none of them, surely, would actually have been offended. The message would have come across much more clearly if the journalist had done something more traditionally American, like casting aspersions on the president’s parentage, motor vehicle, football team, taste in music, or pretzel-consuming ability; while simultaneously performing a thoroughly international gesture for emphasis.

After all, it’s common courtesy to research the ways of foreign visitors so that one doesn’t accidentally offend them. By the same logic, it’s surely common sense to research the ways in which one can cause maximum offense to foreign visitors. In America and Britain, footwear-lobbing (not to mention wellie wanging) is a jolly, even a folksy, kind of sport, like Morris dancing or buffalo chip throwing: more likely to raise a smile than hackles, with the possible exception of a well-aimed high heel. Then again, were George Bush to invite his critic to join him in lobbing a few Texan buffalo chips, I imagine the Iraqi would soon be begging for shoes…

Power’s world: nuclear matchsticks on the Indian sub-continent

Published
by
Jonathan Power
on December 16, 2008
in Asia and United States
. 0 Comments

A nuclear-capable Pershing I missile, from the 1960s: the start of the end?

However tense the relationship between India and Pakistan becomes, the government of Manmohan Singh is highly unlikely to initiate or participate in a nuclear war with Pakistan. That would go against the deeply held moral beliefs of the prime minister. Both he and Congress party chairman, Sonia Gandhi, have told me privately that they are utterly repelled by the idea of such an act. Nevertheless, Singh has had few qualms about supporting the build-up of India’s nuclear deterrent, regarding it as an inevitable process given India’s place in the world; and he has been a passionate advocate of the new nuclear deal with the US that has resulted in Washington lifting its 30-year-old embargo on nuclear supplies for India.

Immediately after the Mumbai atrocities, tough talk seem to billow out of quarters of India’s military and foreign affairs establishment. Singh quickly fanned it away. On the Pakistani side, President Asif Ali Zardari also appeared to be in a peace-making mood. Just before the atrocities, he publicly abandoned his country’s ”first use” doctrine, which had meant that Pakistan could use its nuclear weapons even without an Indian attack. He has also, like his predecessor General Pervez Musharraf, reached out for a deal on the central flash point, the disputed state of Kashmir. Neither he nor Musharraf (once he was in power) ever showed they were the type to reach for their nuclear guns.

But does this mean we don’t have to fear a nuclear war between India and Pakistan? Well, it helps. But India could get more warlike if Singh and Congress are defeated in the coming elections. The main opposition party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, is the one that first publicly demonstrated India’s nuclear deterrent. Meanwhile, on the Pakistani side, there is a growing chance that the war in Afghanistan and the American attacks inside the borders of Pakistan will fan the militancy of a growing part of Pakistani public opinion, with hysterical consequences. Continue reading ‘Power’s world: nuclear matchsticks on the Indian sub-continent’

Prospect reads

Published
by
Susha
on December 13, 2008
in Books and What we're reading
. 1 Comment

Tom Chatfield

 

I’ve been getting a little obsessed with the New Yorker recently, which is probably only a good thing if you have a chic apartment overlooking Central Park and plenty of free time to spend looking out of your window pondering the fate of the world. It really is a chasteningly urbane, well-written magazine, though, and packs its pages with articles more thoroughly researched than most of the slim volumes I receive for review. I especially enjoyed Todd Oppenheimer’s report on the world of master bladesmith Bob Kramer, in which the author laps the civilised world several times in order to tell the inside story of the world’s leading artisan knife-makers and the mysteries of their craft. It’s a perfect example of how to slide vast amounts of careful research into a reader’s consciousness without once being boring or condescending, and I unhesitatingly recommend it to anyone who has ever cut anything in their life, or plans to in the future. Continue reading ‘Prospect reads’

Jean Charles de Menezes: From A Logical Point of View

Published
by
Alexander Fiske-Harrison
on December 12, 2008
in British politics and In the news
. 2 Comments

What happens when it goes wrong?

Despite the vast amount of coverage of the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes, it is remarkable how little of it directs the finger of blame, moral, legal or otherwise, towards those who are ultimately responsible.

The extraordinary circumstances of that day are the single most important factor in this accidental killing of an entirely innocent man by armed police. This in itself goes a long way to explaining quite how unusual this event is in the history of the United Kingdom. There is simply no precedent for an unarmed man being deliberately killed by armed officers in a non-criminal situation.

Obviously, safe-guards must be in place for such a set of circumstances but, given that London is not Tel Aviv, any such set of controls will necessarily be insufficiently tried and tested. However, it does seem that there were certain failures of communication within the command structure of the security operation. The question which must be answered, and it is unclear from the open verdict given today whether or not it directly was, is whether these failures are tolerable, i.e. unavoidable, within the operational constraints of an emergency situation with high potential casualties.

Continue reading ‘Jean Charles de Menezes: From A Logical Point of View’

In defence of Thai monarchy: why the Economist got it wrong

Published
by
William Barnes
on December 12, 2008
in Asia
. 0 Comments

The Thai monarch's flag: time to take it down?

Prospect’s James Crabtree was full of praise for The Economist’s unprecedented, biting articles on the Thai monarchy, “A Right Royal Mess.” It’s a piece that certainly suggests the Economist does not fear moving its South East Asia desk out of Bangkok. Yet the article ultimately misses the central point about the Thai monarchy—that it is a moral compass and a comfort for many Thais, a function never matched even by Queen Victoria in her imperial pomp.

Still, there’s no doubt that it it was brave. And the response of the Thai authorities will be keenly watched. Some 30-odd people have been charged under Thailand’s severe lèse majesté laws (which make insulting the monarchy a criminal offence) over the last couple of years, some for saying far less than the Economist just has. A new government might try to burnish its patriotic credentials with some Brit bashing. Those Thai intellectuals, foreign observers, journalists and academics who find the monarchy curious must be delighted.

Bravery aside, there is a strong whiff of condescension in the Economist’s tone: “It cannot be good for a country to subscribe to a fairy-tale version of its own story” it says. Meanwhile King Bhumibol Adulyadej, 81 last Friday, “risks leaving behind a country unprepared for life without father.” The Economist gives the monarchy credit for nothing: apparently it is an irrational institution, out of time and of scant utility. Yet Thailand’s monarchy coexisted quite comfortably with civilian prime ministers for most of the period between 1980 until a couple of years after Thaksin came to power in 2001. The Economist seems not to have understood that many Thais hate Thaksin for his strange megalomania; an election victory does not licence despotism.

Continue reading ‘In defence of Thai monarchy: why the Economist got it wrong’

Grayling’s question: can the past entitle us to apologies, reparations or recognition today?

Published
by
Tom Chatfield
on December 11, 2008
in Philosophy
. 1 Comment

Now where did I put my copy of Prospect?

Every month, in the front pages of our print edition, Professor AC Grayling answers a philosophical query sent in by one of our readers. As of this month, we’ll be posting each of his questions on the blog as well as on our main website, so readers can discuss the response, contribute their own thoughts—and, of course, send in further questions for future editions. You can post your queries in the blog below, or email them to us at this address. This month, courtesy of Mal Smith in London, our query (along with Prof Grayling’s response) is…

Can the past entitle us to apologies, reparations or recognition today?

It is easy to suppose that history gives us our entitlements just as it tells us who we are. The land our forefathers occupied, the apologies due to us now for the harm done to them then, the works of art they made that are now in other people’s museums—all the sentiments involved here, and many more like them, are bequeathments of history. They are also the source of lingering resentments that can easily flare into conflict, of claims and counter-claims, of romantic yearnings and loyalties.

Consider: the desire of today’s Serbs not to relinquish Kosovo dates back to a battle near Pristina, in 1389, where defeat by the Ottomans became a tribal memory that in the 19th century fuelled nationalistic longing for independence. Likewise, the Jews and Israel, the Greeks and the Elgin Marbles, Islamists and the Caliphate, today’s African-Americans and the history of trans-Atlantic slavery, Scottish separatists, the Flemings and the Walloons of Belgium—all are examples of the past’s influence (some might say, stranglehold) on the present. Continue reading ‘Grayling’s question: can the past entitle us to apologies, reparations or recognition today?’

Prospect’s Public Intellectual of 2008 - who just missed out?

Published
by
James Crabtree
on December 11, 2008
in Inside Prospect
. 1 Comment
but who is 2008s biggest public brain?

but who is 2008's biggest public brain?

We just put the Christmas edition of the magazine to bed, at 3am on Wednesday morning. If you join up for our Facebook group you can see the new cover, and get an overview of the contents. If you aren’t on Facebook, like David Goodhart, our hold-out editor, I’ll put it up here in a day or two. The magazine, meanwhile, arrives at a train station near you in the middle of next week.

Personally, I’m most excited about the results of our public intellectual of 2008 poll. This is different from our previous public vote poll, run with Foreign Policy, to find the greatest living public intellectual. This one is just about the figure who did best in 2008 - and is picked by us, and a team of all-star judges. Thanks to any of you who threw names into the hat for consideration, when we announced it here on First Drafts a month or so ago.

I can’t put the winner on here just yet, but will put the shortlist up shortly. In the meantime, below, are the people who just missed out on the top 10 - those we liked a lot, but didn’t make the cut. More on who actually won in due course - along with the judges’ decisions, and the eventual winner. If this lot didn’t win, who would you have given it to? And what do you make of this longlist - just the same old group of old white English-speaking men? Click the more button to see the list…….

Continue reading ‘Prospect’s Public Intellectual of 2008 - who just missed out?’

Prospect is amused: Krugman, comic strip hero

Published
by
James Crabtree
on December 11, 2008
in Business and Elsewhere on the web
. 1 Comment
Hello there, Paul. Click the pic for the full strip.

Hello there, Paul. Click the pic for the full strip.

[Hat tip: The Browser, thanks guys.]

One Step Closer to an Obama-Ignatieff Continent

Published
by
Taylor Owen
on December 10, 2008
in Foreign affairs
. 4 Comments
The inside story on Ignatieffs unlikely victory

The inside story on his unlikely victory

Somewhere, Samantha Power is smiling. Yesterday, while she was working on Obama’s State Department transition, her predecessor as the head of Harvard University’s Carr Centre for Human Rights (now run by adventurer-cum-Prospect-writer Rory Stewart), and fellow journalist-turned-academic, clinched the nomination for the Liberal Party of Canada.

Michael Ignatieff’s victory comes at a time of great turmoil in Canadian politics. Despite huge enthusiasm for Obama—over 70 per cent of Canadians supported him—the country oddly re-elected a prime minister, Stephen Harper, who in temperament, ideology and style is Obama’s antithesis. But Harper might have reason to take pause; having dismissed the coming recession during the election, he is now faced with holding together a minority government facing a crashing economy and a volatile political mess. And so enters Michael Ignatieff.  But it wasn’t supposed to happen this way.

Continue reading ‘One Step Closer to an Obama-Ignatieff Continent’

Happy day: Ignatieff wins Canada’s liberal leadership

Published
by
James Crabtree
on December 10, 2008
in Uncategorized
. 6 Comments
You did it, eh?

You did it, eh?

Not that corruption in Illinois isn’t diverting enough, but just over the border, Michael Ignatieff has all but won Canada’s liberal leadership. We’ll have another post later today from a Canadian friend of Prospect on the wider significance of all of this. But, briefly, given that their government is in the midst of an unusual constitutional crisis, it’s not impossible that he could be PM next year. This is good news. Iggy is a true public intellectual, and a serious liberal thinker. If you wants to know more—including some quite extraordinary stuff about his difficult relationship with his brother—see this long, brilliant Globe and Mail profile from last year.

Thought for the day. If Ignatieff becomes Canadian PM —which, even if not next year, he probably will soon—then the Anglo-Saxon world will be led by four morally serious, weighty liberal intellectuals: Obama, Brown, Ignatieff and Kevin Rudd. Sod Blagojevich. Isn’t that something to smile about?