I was informed that there is a new blog out there, by Tom Ricks (pictured right) a former reporter with The Wash Post. The blog can be found here. The blog is being hosted by Foreign Policy, a magazine that has been around for a while, but which has just relaunched its web site.Tom Ricks is the author of Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq. Fiasco made Number 1 on the New York Times Book Review bestseller list.
To quote the press release from Foreign Policy, Tom Ricks was:
Born in Massachusetts in 1955, he grew up in New York and Afghanistan and graduated from Yale in 1977. He is a member of the Inter-University Seminar on Armed Forces and Society, the Society for Military History, and the International Institute for Strategic Studies.If you are wondering about the obscure Inter-University Seminar on Armed Forces and Society, it is an organization of people interested in the study of the military from a sociological point of view. One of the founding members was Morris Janowitz, who wrote The Professional Soldier. IUS has its own magazine, Armed Forces and Society.
Looking at the people Mr Ricks lists and quotes in his blog so far, and the range of topics, I think this will be an interesting, informative and challenging read. I commend it to all who are interested in understanding what is happening with not only the US Military, but also in areas were conflict has broken out or is brewing, but we in the US are not yet involved.
Regards -- Cliff
2 comments:
Ezra pointed out Ricks' great blog entry on the strategic folly of Israel and the US "...policies of non-negotiation and non-communication with HAMAS."
Mr Lynne left his comment on the 5th, and I wanted to respond, and while I had read the blog entry on the new SSI publication, I had not read it. Still haven't, but I have read the summary, which was several pages.
I also wanted to go back and read Nir Rosen's latest post (29 Dec 2008), which talks to the issue of "terrorism." As Mr Rosen points out, the problem is that my patriot is your terrorist. Mr Rosen, born in New York, suggests that big countries define terrorists and the oppressed have patriots. Further, in a different forum he has basically said that whatever Hamas does is legitimate in that Israel is oppressing the Palestinians in Gaza.
There are no good answers here. There is a suggested approach in this week's Newsweek, but frankly, it will require outside nations to strong-arm all sides.
I agree with those who point out that Hamas was elected in legitimate elections. The People of Gaza elected them. Their charitable activities alone would recommend them. On the other hand, they hold that Israel and its Jewish citizens must go.
Is there any basis for trust on either side? Without that there is no basis for negotiations. That is, there is no basis for negotiations unless there are outside guarantees. Given everything going on in the world--and much more important issues closer to home--will the new administration have the "bandwidth" to deal with this on a full time basis? That is what it will take--USG attention. Someone with access to the President and support on Capital Hill will have to make this thing work. It might require peacekeepers--US peacekeepers (I don't believe people in Israel trust UN peacekeepers after their experiences with them on the Lebanese border).
Back to Nir Rosen's comments, toward the bottom he says:
QUOTE
There can be only one state in historic Palestine. In coming decades, Israelis will be confronted with two options. Will they peacefully transition towards an equal society, where Palestinians are given the same rights, à la post-apartheid South Africa? Or will they continue to view democracy as a threat? If so, one of the peoples will be forced to leave.
UNQUOTE
This is not a good situation. If you accept this analysis, you need to realize that for Israel this is lose-lose.
Let us hope the new year brings new ideas.
Regards -- Cliff
Post a Comment