And you've earned it, if you've slogged through my recent entries.
Even if you haven't, try this short video, courtesy of a Facebook posting by Bridgett Wagner. It'll transform your opinion of the animal world...or maybe just confirm it.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Sunday, January 30, 2011
The phantom Eurabia?
Bill sent me this link to a Reuters article (it looks like an op-ed or blog entry, but is unsigned) that seeks to debunk any fears that Europe will become Eurabia, a Muslim-dominated continent, later in this century. The news hook is a new Pew survey that shows falling birth rates in Muslim countries - the Reuters piece argues that this finding undercuts all the fearmongers' claims.
My take on the piece?
-- These falling birth rates are no/no surprise; they've been reported for years. Indeed, had the Reuters author looked any further, he would have discovered the argument that, if Muslim is 'to conquer Europe through the wombs of its women,' now is a relatively narrow window of one generation in which to accomplish that.
-- Second, relative absolute growth rates do matter. Here's what the Pew summary actually states: "Globally, the Muslim population is forecast to grow at about twice the rate of the non-Muslim population over the next two decades – an average annual growth rate of 1.5% for Muslims, compared with 0.7% for non-Muslims." Such differentials can have a significant impact on politics and society - just look at the growth rate of the Hispanic population in the United States. And no one is predicting that the United States is about to become an Hispanic country.
-- I also object to the straw men used in the article, including an anonymous video which has been circulating on the internet. Several months ago, someone asked me about that video; I recommended against passing it on because the data was unreliable. There are, however, reputable sources reporting on the increase in Muslim populations in Europe; why didn't the Reuters piece include them?
-- Instead, a number of the links included in the article refer to pieces reporting on the loss of freedom of speech of critics of Islam. What does that have to do with Muslim birthrates? Several of these critics are now on trial in Europe; public information is available on those trials. The author apparently believes these critics deserve what they're getting, but he doesn't come out and say it. Nor does he defend such a position.
-- My final point? The Islamization of Europe does not depend on Muslims becoming the dominant demographic group. It happens much sooner, when non-Muslims start bowing to sharia, ceding their hard-won rights and liberties. That process is already well-underway, even if Reuters wants to pretend otherwise.
My take on the piece?
-- These falling birth rates are no/no surprise; they've been reported for years. Indeed, had the Reuters author looked any further, he would have discovered the argument that, if Muslim is 'to conquer Europe through the wombs of its women,' now is a relatively narrow window of one generation in which to accomplish that.
-- Second, relative absolute growth rates do matter. Here's what the Pew summary actually states: "Globally, the Muslim population is forecast to grow at about twice the rate of the non-Muslim population over the next two decades – an average annual growth rate of 1.5% for Muslims, compared with 0.7% for non-Muslims." Such differentials can have a significant impact on politics and society - just look at the growth rate of the Hispanic population in the United States. And no one is predicting that the United States is about to become an Hispanic country.
-- I also object to the straw men used in the article, including an anonymous video which has been circulating on the internet. Several months ago, someone asked me about that video; I recommended against passing it on because the data was unreliable. There are, however, reputable sources reporting on the increase in Muslim populations in Europe; why didn't the Reuters piece include them?
-- Instead, a number of the links included in the article refer to pieces reporting on the loss of freedom of speech of critics of Islam. What does that have to do with Muslim birthrates? Several of these critics are now on trial in Europe; public information is available on those trials. The author apparently believes these critics deserve what they're getting, but he doesn't come out and say it. Nor does he defend such a position.
-- My final point? The Islamization of Europe does not depend on Muslims becoming the dominant demographic group. It happens much sooner, when non-Muslims start bowing to sharia, ceding their hard-won rights and liberties. That process is already well-underway, even if Reuters wants to pretend otherwise.
Social networking
I'd also like to enter a protest against all the media reports about the importance of social networking in Egypt. Of course Twitter is important; don't get me wrong. But somehow, people are acting as if no one ever knew how to communicate before this. Again, I go back to my experiences in Poland.
The Poles in 1980 remembered very clearly what happened during an uprising in the port city of Gdansk ten years before. The authorities blacked out communications and lied about the number of demonstrators killed. But people knew, and one of the first things that Solidarity did was to erect a monument to the Gdansk victims. There was also an active grapevine reporting on what the government was doing in 1980 and 1981.
Electrifying pictures of people in the streets are great but do little to explain all the other factors that Americans need to know but don't, since they pay little attention to the outside world.
Nor are such pictures likely to affect the official U.S. response. U.S. policy is based on a variety of factors which I don't pretend to understand in full. We told the Shah he needed to make reforms. A year later, we went out of our way not to offend Poland's communist government. When Ahmedinejad stole elections, we said nothing for almost a year. Now we're scolding Mubarak. You go figure.
So yes, I'm a Neanderthal. So do you have an issue with Neanderthals?
The Poles in 1980 remembered very clearly what happened during an uprising in the port city of Gdansk ten years before. The authorities blacked out communications and lied about the number of demonstrators killed. But people knew, and one of the first things that Solidarity did was to erect a monument to the Gdansk victims. There was also an active grapevine reporting on what the government was doing in 1980 and 1981.
Electrifying pictures of people in the streets are great but do little to explain all the other factors that Americans need to know but don't, since they pay little attention to the outside world.
Nor are such pictures likely to affect the official U.S. response. U.S. policy is based on a variety of factors which I don't pretend to understand in full. We told the Shah he needed to make reforms. A year later, we went out of our way not to offend Poland's communist government. When Ahmedinejad stole elections, we said nothing for almost a year. Now we're scolding Mubarak. You go figure.
So yes, I'm a Neanderthal. So do you have an issue with Neanderthals?
Poland and Egypt
Joe suggested that I compare what's going on in Egypt to what happened in Poland in 1980-81, when I was at the embassy there. That was when Solidarity was set up and, after several months of uncertainty and rising revolt against the Communist regime, martial law was declared. (Devotees of this blog - both of them - will remember that I made a similar comparison during the Iranian protests in 2009).
First, an obvious similarity: the regime is old, worn out, and people are disgusted with it and with their parlous economic situation. But remember: Solidarity was born in the summer of 1980; martial law was declared in March 1981, but the communist government lasted until the end of that decade. So Poles endured a long, painful time of repression after a peaceful, mass movement against the communist regime.
Second, a potential similarity to ponder: the Polish army was not about to attack Polish civilian demonstrators. When martial law was declared, the authorities relied instead on a special paramilitary force drawn from the scum of society and trained in secret for several months. So now the Egyptian police have evaporated and the army looks like it doesn't want to attack civilians...so is there someone else out there? Maybe not, since this has all happened so quickly.
Third, a big difference: there was no force like the Muslim Brotherhood - a well-established group with lots of overseas links and, presumably, access to money and other resources. Solidarity was only created in 1980 and, despite any accusations you may have heard to the contrary, was not/not supported by the U.S. government or any other outsiders. While it was weak, it didn't have compete with another popular but very undemocratic and illiberal group.
Fourth, another big difference: Poland was one of several Warsaw Pact members who had sought to escape Soviet domination. Perhaps there was a shared anti-communist ideology, but nothing that compares to the aggressive Islamism that has spread in the Mideast and North Africa ever since the Iranian revolution in 1979. Poland was actually a leader: the Solidarity movement was the first ever mass movement of workers against a communist workers' paradise.
In sum, I don't see too many points of similarity between Poland then and Egypt now. Unfortunately.
First, an obvious similarity: the regime is old, worn out, and people are disgusted with it and with their parlous economic situation. But remember: Solidarity was born in the summer of 1980; martial law was declared in March 1981, but the communist government lasted until the end of that decade. So Poles endured a long, painful time of repression after a peaceful, mass movement against the communist regime.
Second, a potential similarity to ponder: the Polish army was not about to attack Polish civilian demonstrators. When martial law was declared, the authorities relied instead on a special paramilitary force drawn from the scum of society and trained in secret for several months. So now the Egyptian police have evaporated and the army looks like it doesn't want to attack civilians...so is there someone else out there? Maybe not, since this has all happened so quickly.
Third, a big difference: there was no force like the Muslim Brotherhood - a well-established group with lots of overseas links and, presumably, access to money and other resources. Solidarity was only created in 1980 and, despite any accusations you may have heard to the contrary, was not/not supported by the U.S. government or any other outsiders. While it was weak, it didn't have compete with another popular but very undemocratic and illiberal group.
Fourth, another big difference: Poland was one of several Warsaw Pact members who had sought to escape Soviet domination. Perhaps there was a shared anti-communist ideology, but nothing that compares to the aggressive Islamism that has spread in the Mideast and North Africa ever since the Iranian revolution in 1979. Poland was actually a leader: the Solidarity movement was the first ever mass movement of workers against a communist workers' paradise.
In sum, I don't see too many points of similarity between Poland then and Egypt now. Unfortunately.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
So what about Israel?
Assuming that the unrest in Egypt leads, sooner or later, to the departure of Hosni Mubarak from the scene, what does that mean for Israel? As American-Israeli commentator Caroline Glick argues, no matter what scenario you choose, the news is bad.
Essentially, for decades the Egyptian government has defended its highly unpopular peace treaty with Israel by tolerating if not promoting anti-semitism in Egypt which today has reached phenomenal levels.
At the same time, as part of the Camp David accords, for the last thirty years the United States has been arming and training the Egyptian military. As a result, she writes, "the Egyptian military today makes the military Israel barely defeated in 1973 look like a gang of cavemen. Egypt has nearly 300 F-16s. Its main battle tank is the M1A1 which it produces in Egypt. Its navy is largest in the region. Its army is twice the size of the IDF. Its air defense force constitutes a massive threat to the IAF. And of course, the ballistic missiles and chemical weapons it has purchased from the likes of North Korea and China give it a significant stand-off mass destruction capability."
So what about El Baradei, who is emerging as a likely rival to Mubarak? Well, he just spent years at the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency protecting Iran's nascent nuclear weapons program. And he is close to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, which now appears to back him. In another report, Michel Garrote reports that Bedouins have attacked Egyptian police stations. They are suspected of acting as mercenaries and smuggling arms to Hamas, which has ties to Iran. In other words, many signs point to substantial Iranian meddling in Egyptian affairs.
If you add to this assessment the ascendancy of Hezbollah in Lebanon, Israel's mid-term prospects for avoiding war are bleak; those for achieving peace are less than zero.
Essentially, for decades the Egyptian government has defended its highly unpopular peace treaty with Israel by tolerating if not promoting anti-semitism in Egypt which today has reached phenomenal levels.
At the same time, as part of the Camp David accords, for the last thirty years the United States has been arming and training the Egyptian military. As a result, she writes, "the Egyptian military today makes the military Israel barely defeated in 1973 look like a gang of cavemen. Egypt has nearly 300 F-16s. Its main battle tank is the M1A1 which it produces in Egypt. Its navy is largest in the region. Its army is twice the size of the IDF. Its air defense force constitutes a massive threat to the IAF. And of course, the ballistic missiles and chemical weapons it has purchased from the likes of North Korea and China give it a significant stand-off mass destruction capability."
So what about El Baradei, who is emerging as a likely rival to Mubarak? Well, he just spent years at the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency protecting Iran's nascent nuclear weapons program. And he is close to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, which now appears to back him. In another report, Michel Garrote reports that Bedouins have attacked Egyptian police stations. They are suspected of acting as mercenaries and smuggling arms to Hamas, which has ties to Iran. In other words, many signs point to substantial Iranian meddling in Egyptian affairs.
If you add to this assessment the ascendancy of Hezbollah in Lebanon, Israel's mid-term prospects for avoiding war are bleak; those for achieving peace are less than zero.
Whither Egypt?
I just watched CNN coverage of the situation in Egypt, and could only marvel at their ability to assume a good outcome, and the casual way in which they treat the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist organization most likely to control the government if Hosni Mubarak disappears from the scene.
It's amazing: 'moderate' Islamists came to power in Turkey in 2002 and ever since then Turkey has headed slowly into the Islamic camp, distancing itself from the United States in favor of strategic alliances with Syria and Iran, closing down the media and opposition, fanning a hate campaign against Israel and the Jews. CNN (along with other media outlets) seems to have missed that chapter.
Now it's the turn of Egypt. Here's a sober analysis by Mideast scholar Barry Rubin. He notes that, unlike Tunisia, Egypt has a strong Islamist movement and a weak middle class. And Egyptian opinion polls show strong support for severe sharia punishments, and sympathy for terrorism.
Rubin concludes that, if a Muslim Brotherhood network comes to power in Egypt, the consequences for Israel and the Western democracies will be severe:
"renewed warfare, overwhelming anti-Americanism, efforts to spread revolution to other moderate states, a potential alignment with Iran and Syria (though that might not happen), incredible damage to Western interests. In short, a real disaster. What shocks me is that Western media and experts seem so carried away by this movement they are only considering a best-case outcome."
It's amazing: 'moderate' Islamists came to power in Turkey in 2002 and ever since then Turkey has headed slowly into the Islamic camp, distancing itself from the United States in favor of strategic alliances with Syria and Iran, closing down the media and opposition, fanning a hate campaign against Israel and the Jews. CNN (along with other media outlets) seems to have missed that chapter.
Now it's the turn of Egypt. Here's a sober analysis by Mideast scholar Barry Rubin. He notes that, unlike Tunisia, Egypt has a strong Islamist movement and a weak middle class. And Egyptian opinion polls show strong support for severe sharia punishments, and sympathy for terrorism.
Rubin concludes that, if a Muslim Brotherhood network comes to power in Egypt, the consequences for Israel and the Western democracies will be severe:
"renewed warfare, overwhelming anti-Americanism, efforts to spread revolution to other moderate states, a potential alignment with Iran and Syria (though that might not happen), incredible damage to Western interests. In short, a real disaster. What shocks me is that Western media and experts seem so carried away by this movement they are only considering a best-case outcome."
Monday, January 24, 2011
A grim view of France
Nidra Poller, a longtime American resident of France, offers a sobering view of French reality. She details a horrifying kaleidoscope of violent crime that French media hide from view and the French elite pretend desperately is not happening.
Excusing this behavior while failing to enforce French law at home, Poller says, is similar to the French attitude towards Israel and the Palestinians: "A compassionate discourse that excuses Palestinian atrocities against Israeli civilians as a reaction to 'injustice' also excuses French domestic criminality as payback for colonization, discrimination, exclusion, unemployment, and police harassment."
Nor does it help to deny the connection between Islamist demonstrators and the violence in the streets. The street thugs they thrive in the atmosphere of hatred of French state and society, and their mayhem advances Islamist objectives.
My advice: book your French vacation sooner rather than later!
Excusing this behavior while failing to enforce French law at home, Poller says, is similar to the French attitude towards Israel and the Palestinians: "A compassionate discourse that excuses Palestinian atrocities against Israeli civilians as a reaction to 'injustice' also excuses French domestic criminality as payback for colonization, discrimination, exclusion, unemployment, and police harassment."
Nor does it help to deny the connection between Islamist demonstrators and the violence in the streets. The street thugs they thrive in the atmosphere of hatred of French state and society, and their mayhem advances Islamist objectives.
My advice: book your French vacation sooner rather than later!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
