Défense et Illustration de Jacques Chirac

October 31, 2009

jc-jacques-chirac

Une tribune de Narcisse Caméléon

Le renvoi de Jacques Chirac devant la justice pour “détournements de biens publics” et “abus de confiance” dans le cadre de l’affaire des chargés de mission de la Ville de Paris est non seulement superflu, mais aussi et surtout moralement douteux, eu égard au fait que les délits reprochés remontent à plus de vingt ans et que tous les partis politiques ont eu recours à ces pratiques.

La justice devrait faire le procès de la classe politique entière au lieu de s’acharner sur un homme qui a servi la France de manière exemplaire pendant plus de quarante ans.

C’est une constante bien française, la nation décapite le Père, celui qui incarne le mieux ce qu’elle est, en érigeant l’échafaud en place publique; observez la chose, elle est invariablement la même: la tête du monarque, bon, débonnaire, doit être donnée aux chacals qui n’en feront qu’une bouchée : Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité. Comme le disait le Général De Gaulle: “Les Français sont des veaux”. Jacques Chirac s’en sortira, c’est une question d’honneur pour la France. Souvenons-nous des années Mitterrand, des suicides, des scandales personnels et des dépenses royales, corruption et république bananière à tire-larigotOui, il ira devant les juges, il passera quelques nuits blanches, mais il se relèvera, tête haute.

L’ancien président de la République et maire de Paris Jacques Chirac s’exprimait il y a près de deux ans sur tous les chefs d’accusation calomnieuse lancés à son encontre. Sa tribune parue dans le quotidien Le Monde peut être lue ici.

NDLR: Les textes et essais publiés sur HIRAM7 REVIEW n’engagent que leurs auteurs et ne reflètent pas nécessairement l’opinion de la rédaction.


Alan Poseners Kolumne: Henryk M. Broders belangloser PR-Coup

October 29, 2009

Der britisch-deutsche Journalist Alan Posener kommentiert wöchentlich das Zeitgeschehen in Politik, Gesellschaft, Wirtschaft und Kultur für HIRAM7 REVIEW.

Von Alan Posener
Die Welt / Welt am Sonntag  / HIRAM7 REVIEW

Es ist schon erstaunlich: Wenn man in Deutschland eine Stellungnahme zum Holocaust braucht, ruft man die Agentur Rent-a-Jew an und bekommt je nach politischer Präferenz einen Juden zugeteilt, obwohl der Holocaust die Juden nicht mehr angeht als die Arier; weniger sogar, denn das Klärungsbedürftige am Holocaust liegt nicht auf der Opfer-, sondern auf der Täterseite.

Wenn es aber um Henryk M. Broders Kandidatur für den Posten des Präsidenten des Zentralrats der Juden gibt, dann haben plötzlich alle Gojim selbst eine Meinung, obwohl der Zentralrat eigentlich nur die Juden etwas angeht.

Und diese Meinung lautet: Gut, dass der Kerl den Zentralrat aufmischt.
Das sollte einen stutzig machen.

Wenn der Zentralrat, wie Henryk meint, so ungefährlich und gestrig ist, warum sind alle Gojim so froh, dass Broder ihm zeigen will, wo der Hammer hängt?

Überhaupt: Warum tun alle so, als habe Henryks Kandidatur etwas zu tun mit einer Krise des Zentralrats, wo sie doch nur etwas zu tun hat mit einer Lebenskrise Henryk M. Broders?

Ich habe mit dem Zentralrat genauso wenig zu tun wie Henryk. Weniger, denn pro forma könnte er etwas damit zu tun haben, wenn er wollte, was er aber nicht will. Ich nicht.

Ich stelle nur eine Frage: Im Spiegel hat Henryk seine Selbsteinschätzung wiederholt, er sei der „Pausenclown“ der Deutschen. Das stimmt, und diese Rolle hat er sich hart erarbeitet.

Soll der Sprecher der Juden in Deutschland ein Clown sein? Wer könnte das wollen? Wem würde das nutzen? Außer Henryk, meine ich.

Die in HIRAM7 REVIEW veröffentlichten Essays und Kommentare geben nicht grundsätzlich den Standpunkt der Redaktion wieder.


Sumit Lal: The ubiquitous Indian

October 28, 2009

Our friend from New Delhi, Sumit Lal, former Director and General Manager at ECCO INDIA, and currently Business Adviser at ECCO Asia Pacific Limited, has just started his own blog.

Please check it out here.


Earl Shugerman’s Corner: Life’s little pleasures in Israel

October 27, 2009

 Earl Shugerman brings every week a serie of stories about Anglo-Saxon immigrants to Israel. This project is aimed to promote a more realistic view of life in Israel.

Yesterday, a group of my Anglo friends and I were sitting at Lias Books sharing ideas about entertainment for the weekend. Israelis are avid readers and my favorite pastime is reading detective novels and attending book clubs. I am a particular fan of James Patterson.

Israelis also love movies. Haifa, my hometown has 22 theaters that show movies in most major languages and for all ages. Popcorn, hot dogs and cokes are usually available, but often at inflated prices. The ticket costs are comparable to those in America. Most movie theaters are located in malls, and allow the audiences to enjoy cafes, window shopping, and other mall amenities. Many cafes have outdoor terraces due to the balmy climate.

Cinema King: The Cinemall at Lev Hamifratz, Haifa boasts a spectacular 23 screens.

The Cinemall at Lev Hamifratz, Haifa boasts a spectacular 23 screens.

Very sadly, the revered American pastime of the Sunday afternoon drive is not part of Israeli entertainment. Driving in Israel is at best a rugged adventure. Israeli drivers are not known for their patience and in many parts of the country parking is a real nightmare. By contrast, the public transportation in the country is wonderful. In many places, bus and train services are readily available and inexpensive.

The entertainment of Haifa surely showcases a wide range of fascinating things you can do here, and in many cities in Israel. Among the large number of things to do in Haifa, you would probably first look for some eating joints in the city. Dining is one of the best forms of Haifa entertainment, with a large number of places offering everything from French, Italian, Chinese, Continental and the traditional Middle Eastern dishes. Located in some of the most convenient spots and serving delicious dishes, the popular restaurants in Haifa are surely a must try. The joy of international dining in Israel is enhanced by the number of nationalities and languages spoken by diners and staff in most houses of cuisine. One Saturday night, my American companion, Linda and I counted seven languages while dining at our favorite cafe. We strolled along the Haifa beachfront after dinner.

After a wholesome meal at the restaurants you can also check out the scintillating nightlife of Haifa. Wonderful ambiance and great music, combined with the liquor of your choice will surely give you an excuse to party the night away. Shopping in Haifa is great. You can buy fashionable clothes, hand-blown glass, silver, enamel, pottery and also gold jewelry. Entertainment in Haifa thus includes the major shopping zones of the city on Masada Streets and also the Panorama Center. Many American products are sold in major malls.

The theaters in Haifa are popularly endorsed by both indigenous folk and tourists. They showcase the best of the local culture and traditions. Thus the major places of interest in Haifa also include the performance halls like the Haifa Auditorium and the Haifa Municipal Theater. Other than live theater, they are also known for hosting dance recitals, musical performances, orchestra and many more.

For the family, entertainment in Haifa is not complete without Sports and Recreation. Full of fun and pleasure, the activities like tennis, bowling, basketball, skating, football, fencing, diving hiking, biking, swimming will provide you with a lot to indulge yourself in.

Israel is a small country about the size of New Jersey.  The three major cities of Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and Haifa are relatively close. A road trip running north to south can embrace them all in an hour and one half. My friend Helen commented yesterday that; “it is still amazing to me that I can visit the holy sites in Jerusalem, take a short swim in the Sea of Galilee, and dine in Tel Aviv in the same day!”

Israelis watch more television and play more video games per- capita than any nation in the world. I am writing this article at the University of Haifa. My computer neighbors asked me to join them in a few hands of video poker! “This is my favorite pastime”, exclaimed David, a young American Oleh! “What about your work?”, I joked. He laughed in a good natured manner and drew a losing hand.

Welcome to modern Israel!

About the author: Earl Shugerman is a retired American Government public relations specialist,  currently spokesperson in Haifa for The Jewish Agency and a writer specializing in interfaith relations. He has worked together with the Catholic and Southern Baptist Movements, the Reformed Jewish Movement and Muslim groups in interfaith activities.


Sir James Paul McCartney’s Good Evening Europe Tour 2009

October 24, 2009
Photograph of Paul McCartney as The Beatles arrive in New York City in 1964.
Legendary singer and songwriter Paul McCartney (67) – knighted Sir James Paul by Queen Elizabeth II on March 11, 1997 – unveiled his schedule for his “Good Evening Tour Europe 2009”.
 
It will be a seven city run, that will mark his only appearance in Europe this year, starting with his “hometown” Hamburg, where The Beatles Story began.

Good Evening Europe Tour 2009:

December 2, 2009: Hamburg, Germany – Color Line Arena
December 3, 2009: Berlin, Germany – O2 World
December 9, 2009: Arnhem, Holland – Gelredome
December 10, 2009: Paris, France – Bercy
December 16, 2009: Cologne, Germany – Koln Arena
December 20, 2009: Dublin, Ireland – The O2
December 22, 2009: London, England – The O2 Arena


Start-Up Nation: The Story of Israel’s Economic Miracle

October 24, 2009

The Story of Israel's Economic Miracle

“The West needs innovation; Israel’s got it,” write Dan Senor and Saul Singer, authors of Start-Up Nation: The Story of Israel’s Economic Miracle. They argue that the Israeli economic model, based on innovation, can help the West, in particular, “get out of its economic hole.”

Start-Up Nation addresses the trillion-dollar question: How is it that Israel – a country of 7.1 million people, only sixty years old, surrounded by enemies, in a constant state of war since its founding, with no natural resources – produces more start-up companies than large, peaceful, and stable nations like Japan, China, India, Korea, Canada, and the United Kingdom?

Drawing on examples from the country’s foremost inventors and investors, geopolitical experts Dan Senor and Saul Singer describe how Israel’s adversity-driven culture fosters a unique combination of innovative and entrepreneurial intensity.

As the authors argue, Israel is not just a country but a comprehensive state of mind. Whereas Americans emphasize decorum and exhaustive preparation, Israelis put chutzpah first. “When an Israeli entrepreneur has a business idea, he will start it that week,” one analyst put it. At the geopolitical level, Senor and Singer dig in deeper to show why Israel’s policies on immigration, R&D, and military service have been key factors in the country’s rise – providing insight into why Israel has more companies on the NASDAQ than those from all of Europe, Korea, Japan, Singapore, China, and India combined.

So much has been written about the Middle East, but surprisingly little is understood about the story and strategy behind Israel’s economic growth. As Start-Up Nation shows, there are lessons in Israel’s example that apply not only to other nations, but also to individuals seeking to build a thriving organization. As the U.S. economy seeks to reboot its can-do spirit, there’s never been a better time to look at this remarkable and resilient nation for some impressive, surprising clues.

Reviews & Endorsements

“An eye-opening look at a side of Israel that most people never think about.” (The Week)

“There is a great deal for America to learn from the very impressive Israeli entrepreneurial model—beginning with a culture of leadership and risk management. Start-Up Nation is a playbook for every CEO who wants to develop the next generation of corporate leaders.” Tom Brokaw, special correspondent for NBC News, author of The Greatest Generation

“Senor and Singer’s experience in government, in business, and in journalism—and especially on the ground in the Middle East—come to life in their illuminating, timely, and often surprising analysis.” George Stephanopoulos, host of This Week, ABC News

“In the midst of the chaos of the Middle East, there’s a remarkable story of innovation. Start-Up Nation is filled with inspiring insights into what’s behind Israel’s dynamic economy. It is a timely book and a much-needed celebration of the entrepreneurial spirit.” Meg Whitman, former president and CEO of eBay

“Senor and Singer highlight some important lessons and sound instruction for countries struggling to enter the 21st century. An edifying, cogent report, as apolitical as reasonably possible, about homemade nation building.” Kirkus Reviews

“The authors ground their analysis in case studies and interviews with some of Israel’s most brilliant innovators to make this a rich and insightful read not just for business leaders and policymakers but for anyone curious about contemporary Israeli culture.” Publishers Weekly

To order the book, click here.


Alan Posener’s Column: The Open Society and its Trends

October 23, 2009

by Alan Posener
Die Welt / Welt am Sonntag  / HIRAM7 REVIEW

Something’s going on in Europe, and I don’t like it.

There’s the future German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle’s refusal to even listen to the question of a BBC correspondent, unless it’s put to him in German:

There’s the BBC giving the British National Party’s Nick Griffin a nationwide TV platform for his racist and anti-Semitic views.

And there’s people not only defending German Central Banker Thilo Sarrazin’s right to make racist comments, but denying that they are racist and demanding a muzzle for people who dare to say they are racist.

You only have to look at the comments on Youtube and elsewhere to realize what it is that is going on here: the political and chattering classes have abandoned the rules governing their chatter; nationalism, racism and intolerance in general are being allowed back into polite society after spending the past 40 years out in the cold.

Political correctness – that great civilizer – is dead. Multiculturalism is under siege. And the ban on anti-Semitism – which the Catholic Church has already lifted by welcoming back the anti-Semitic Pius Brotherhood into its ranks – will soon be as worthless as the paper on which Sir Karl Popper’s great book on the Open Society was written.

I mention Karl Popper, because in the age of Totalitarianism he confronted a vexing question of democracy head-on: was the open society bound by its own philosophical, legal and political parameters to tolerate the propaganda of its enemies?

Popper said no: there was no reason to tolerate intolerance; no reason to grant freedom to the enemies of freedom; there should be no openness towards the enemies of openness. People who want one man, one vote one time should not – as they were in Gaza – be allowed to contest elections. Democracy is more important than freedom; more important than truth; more important than justice – or any one of the multitude of ideas, concepts, slogans and ideals in whose name one could (and people have tried to) suspend democracy.

It’s always the enemies of tolerance who chafe at this seeming intolerance of democracy. One shouldn’t let oneself be fooled. People say, “If you stop people from saying what Sarrazin said, you are denying 80 percent of the population a voice.”

Well, if 80 percent of the population are racist, which I don’t believe for a moment, but I’m saying if, then fuck them and there’s all the more reason to keep a tight lid on what is said by public figures, isn’t there?

Popper didn’t call his book “The Majority Rules”, he called it “The Open Society”. Even 99 percent of the population don’t have the right to dismantle the open society and replace it with a society in which privileges are awarded or denied according to race, religion, creed, gender, sexual orientation or social background.

That’s what Europe has been about this past half-century. Let’s keep it that way.


Earl Shugerman’s Corner: Hannah’s Aliyah to Israel

October 18, 2009

Earl Shugerman brings every week a serie of stories about Anglo-Saxon immigrants to Israel. This project is aimed to promote a more realistic view of life in Israel.

Aliyah is the word that describes the return of the Jewish People from the exile in the Diaspora back to the Land of Israel. The word Aliyah is derived from the verb “laalot” which means “to go up”, or “to ascend” in a positive spiritual sense. A person who makes Aliyah is called an Oleh, meaning “one who goes up”. Making Aliyah heralds a new dawn. People redefine their aspirations and focus on a positive future. Finding a meaningful and loving relationship is an inherent feature of Israeli culture. As Hannah discovered, help was close at hand.

When I came to Haifa for a family Seder in 2006, I decided I could retire here.  I had wanted to retire for some time but didn’t know where.  I had lived in Massachusetts for 28 years but couldn’t imagine spending my winters there as a retiree.  When I got to Haifa, a very big light bulb came on!

I had a very good life in the States but there was one goal I hadn’t been able to reach.  I wanted to meet a kind, intelligent, sexy, fun Jewish male around my age and for years I put this goal on my “top goals list” but never reached it.

When I got to Haifa, one of the first things I did was to attend services at Or Hadash, a reform synagogue in my neighbourhood.  I met a very kind Israeli woman called Pnina there and she made me feel very welcome and introduced me to many members of the congregation. I immediately felt very comfortable and “at home” and Or Hadash became my shul.

One day Pnina and I were looking over at the male congregation and every man I asked about was married. She asked me if I wanted to meet someone and I said yes.  She arranged for me to meet the father of one of her friends – an Australian widower, a year older than me. We had a blind date and continued seeing each other on an irregular basis. After seven months of getting to know each other, we began a more serious relationship and now, just over a year later, we are very happy doing many things together. He has introduced me to his children and grandchildren and has met my mother, sister, brother-in-law and various friends. In October we are planning to travel to Australia together to welcome his son’s first child there.

I was already enjoying my Aliyah here and meeting Shmuel was the “icing on the cake.” 


British Army Hero Tells UN Human Rights Council: ‘Israeli Defense Forces Most Moral Army in History of Warfare’

October 16, 2009

Today’s emergency United Nations Human Rights Council debate in Geneva on the Goldstone Report predictably saw a line-up of the world’s worst abusers condemn democratic Israel for human rights violations.

In a heated lynch mob atmosphere, Kuwait slammed Israel for “intentional killing, intentional destruction of civilian objects, intentional scorched-earth policy”, saying Israel “embodied the Agatha Christie novel, ‘Escaped with Murder’. Pakistan said the “horrors of Israeli occupation continue to haunt the international community’s conscience.” The Arab League said, “We must condemn Israel and force Israel to accept international legitimacy.” Ahmadinejad’s Iran said “the atrocities committed against Palestinians during the aggressions on Gaza should be taken seriously” and followed up by the international community “to put an end to absolute impunity and defiance of the law.”

What the world’s assembled representatives did not expect, however, was the speech that followed (see video and text below), organized by UN Watch. The speaker is a man who repeatedly put his life on the line to defend the democratic world from the murderous Saddam Hussein, Al Qaeda, and the Taliban. The moment he began his first sentence, the room simply fell silent. Judge Goldstone, author of the biased report that prompted today’s one-sided condemnation, had refused to hear Colonel Kemp’s testimony during his “fact-finding” hearings.

But UN Watch made sure today that this hero’s voice would be heard – at the United Nations, and around the world.

***

UN Human Rights Council, 12th Special Session
Debate on Goldstone Report – Geneva, October 16, 2009

Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) Did More to Safeguard Civilians Than Any Army in History of Warfare

Colonel Richard Kemp served in the British Army from 1977 - 2006.
Colonel Richard Kemp served in the British Army from 1977 – 2006.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I am the former commander of the British forces in Afghanistan. I served with NATO and the United Nations; commanded troops in Northern Ireland, Bosnia and Macedonia; and participated in the Gulf War. I spent considerable time in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, and worked on international terrorism for the UK Government’s Joint Intelligence Committee.

Mr. President, based on my knowledge and experience, I can say this: During Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli Defence Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.

Israel did so while facing an enemy that deliberately positioned its military capability behind the human shield of the civilian population.

Hamas, like Hizballah, are expert at driving the media agenda. Both will always have people ready to give interviews condemning Israeli forces for war crimes. They are adept at staging and distorting incidents.

The IDF faces a challenge that we British do not have to face to the same extent. It is the automatic, Pavlovian presumption by many in the international media, and international human rights groups, that the IDF are in the wrong, that they are abusing human rights.

The truth is that the IDF took extraordinary measures to give Gaza civilians notice of targeted areas, dropping over 2 million leaflets, and making over 100,000 phone calls. Many missions that could have taken out Hamas military capability were aborted to prevent civilian casualties. During the conflict, the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza. To deliver aid virtually into your enemy’s hands is, to the military tactician, normally quite unthinkable. But the IDF took on those risks.

Despite all of this, of course innocent civilians were killed. War is chaos and full of mistakes. There have been mistakes by the British, American and other forces in Afghanistan and in Iraq, many of which can be put down to human error. But mistakes are not war crimes.

More than anything, the civilian casualties were a consequence of Hamas’ way of fighting. Hamas deliberately tried to sacrifice their own civilians.

Mr. President, Israel had no choice apart from defending its people, to stop Hamas from attacking them with rockets.

And I say this again: the IDF did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.

Thank you, Mr. President.


Alan Poseners Kolumne: Weg mit dem Gesundheitsfonds!

October 16, 2009

Der britisch-deutsche Journalist Alan Posener kommentiert wöchentlich das Zeitgeschehen in Politik, Gesellschaft, Wirtschaft und Kultur für HIRAM7 REVIEW.

Von Alan Posener
Die Welt / Welt am Sonntag  / HIRAM7 REVIEW

Vorneweg, ceterum censeo:

www.welt.de/videos/debatte/article4835598/Sarrazins-Rassismus-bleibt-Bullshit.html

Aber darum soll es hier nicht gehen, sondern um einen Telefonanruf.

Eine junge Frau ruft bei ihrer Frauenärztin an. Sie braucht einen Termin. Die Sprechstundenhilfe, nach einigem Hin und Her, im leicht genervten Ton: „Also, ich kann Ihnen frühestens am 2. Dezember einen Termin anbieten.“ Also in SECHS WOCHEN. Die junge Frau sagt zu, die Sprechstundenhilfe klickt ein bisschen in ihrem Computer herum, und plötzlich ertönt Warteschleifenmusik. Die junge Frau wartet. Dann ist eine völlig umgewandelte Sprechstundenhilfe dran: „Aber Frau P., Sie haben ja gar nicht gesagt, dass Sie Privatpatientin sind! Da hätten wir einen Termin für Sie, am 21.“ „November?“ „Wo denken Sie hin? Oktober!“ Also in EINER WOCHE.

Man hört immer, besonders von SPD-Seite, es gehe darum, „eine Zweiklassenmedizin in Deutschland zu verhindern“. Hallo? Wir haben längst eine Zweiklassenmedizin.

Und es geht nicht nur darum, dass eine Kassenpatientin sechs Wochen, eine Privatpatientin eine Woche auf einen Termin warten muss, obwohl das schlimm genug ist und in manchen Fällen den Unterschied zwischen einer gerade noch rechtzeitig erkannten und einer zu spät erkannten Krankheit bedeuten kann. Die praktizierte Medizin ist auch verschieden für Ober- und Untermenschen.

Ein Beispiel: Meine Frau ist als Beamtin privat versichert; ich bin als Angestellter freiwillig in der gesetzlichen (ich weiß… selber schuld… lange Geschichte.). Zufällig hatten wir in der letzten Zeit kurz hintereinander die gleichen Beschwerden entwickelt (das Phänomen nennt man bei langjährigen Ehepaaren oder Hundehaltern Anähnelung), und darum empfahl mir meine Frau auch ihren Orthopäden, der tatsächlich auch exakt die gleiche Diagnose stellte. Freilich war die Therapie völlig verschieden, was die verschriebenen Medikamente, Schmerz- und Hilfsmittel betrifft. Und zwar schlicht und einfach derart, dass ich weniger oder nichts bekam.

Vielleicht gibt es Ärzte, die keinen Unterschied zwischen Kassen- und Privatpatienten machen; aber man darf annehmen, dass das die Ausnahmen sind. Die Dummen.

Noch einmal: wir haben längst eine Zweiklassenmedizin. Man kann sagen: das ist nun einmal so; alles, was über die Basisversorgung hinausgeht, muss eben privat versichert sein, und das können dann eben nur die Besserverdienenden – und dann ist jeder Besserverdienende, der wie ich in der gesetzlichen Versicherung bleibt, eben dumm.

Man kann leugnen, dass das so ist, wie die meisten Parteien, die Ärzteorganisationen und Versicherungen, die behaupten, es gehe ihnen darum, für jeden Patienten eine optimale Versorgung sicherzustellen. Wer ihnen glaubt, ist selber schuld.

Man kann wie in Großbritannien das System verstaatlichen, so dass es alle gleich schlecht haben – mit  Ausnahme der ganz Reichen, die sich in Abu Dhabi behandeln lassen, wohin auch die guten Ärzte auswandern.

Oder man kann eine private Gesundheitsfürsorge für alle einführen, mit kostendeckenden Beiträgen einerseits und Versicherungszwang andererseits – und die wirklich Bedürftigen, sagen wir Arbeitslose und Rentner, durch Zuschüsse staatlicherseits instand setzen, ihre Beiträge zu zahlen. Ich befürworte den letzten Vorschlag.

Und deshalb: Weg mit dem Gesundheitsfonds und der Einteilung von Menschen in Patienten erster und zweiter Klasse. Telefongespräche wie das eingangs geschilderte sollten so schnell wie möglich der Vergangenheit angehören. 

Die in HIRAM7 REVIEW veröffentlichten Essays und Kommentare geben nicht grundsätzlich den Standpunkt der Redaktion wieder.


How We Can Win in Afghanistan

October 14, 2009
 

U.S. Soldiers with the 101st Division Special Troops Battalion, 101st Airborne Division watch as two Chinook helicopters fly in to take them back to Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, November 4, 2008.

U.S. Soldiers with the 101st Division Special Troops Battalion, 101st Airborne Division watch as two Chinook helicopters fly in to take them back to Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, November 4, 2008.

The most pressing issue on the U.S. president’s agenda today is whether he will commit more troops to Afghanistan – the “good war.”

In an article published in the November issue of Commentary Magazine, military historian Max Boot brings all his expertise to bear on explaining how the U.S. can win in that Taliban-plagued country.

But first we have to win the battle at home – the battle to convince Barack Obama to learn the right lessons from history and to heed the wise counsel of his own general, Stanley A. McChrystal.

Read full story.


Alan Poseners Kolumne: Benedikts Kreuzzug – Der Angriff des Vatikans auf die moderne Gesellschaft

October 13, 2009

Der britisch-deutsche Journalist Alan Posener kommentiert wöchentlich das Zeitgeschehen in Politik, Gesellschaft, Wirtschaft und Kultur für HIRAM7 REVIEW.

Von Alan Posener
Die Welt / Welt am Sonntag  / HIRAM7 REVIEW

Konservative sind stolz darauf, die besseren Menschen zu sein. Andere mögen bessere Ideen haben; sie mögen moralisch anspruchsvoller sein (dann werden sie von den Konservativen verächtlich „Gutmenschen“ genannt), aber weil der Konservative seinen privaten Anstand über die Ideen der Menschheitsbeglücker stellt, ist er am Ende eben der wahre Gutmensch.

In den letzten Tagen hatte ich zwei Mal die Möglichkeit, dieses konservative Selbstbild zu überprüfen. Zwei Konservative, mit denen ich bekannt, ja beinahe befreundet bin, haben mein Buch über Benedikt XVI besprochen: der katholische Arzt, Psychiater und Theologe Dr. Manfred Lütz, und der CDU-nahe Publizist Dr. Alexander Gauland.

Hier sind die Besprechungen:

Dr. Manfred Lütz, Frankfurter Rundschau, 12.10.2009

Dr. Alexander Gauland, Deutschlandradio Kultur, 04.10.2009

Niemand hat sie gezwungen, das Buch zu besprechen – sie wurden von den Redaktionen darum gebeten, und auch Konservative sind nur Menschen. Beiden war ein wenig unwohl bei der Sache. Das weiß ich, weil der eine mich vorher angerufen hat, ums sich sozusagen von vornherein Absolution erteilen zu lassen für den beabsichtigten Verriss; der zweite rief mich danach an und fragte als erstes: „Na, reden Sie überhaupt noch mit mir?“ Beiden war natürlich klar, dass ich die Absolution erteilen würde, dass ich nicht vorhabe, öffentlich ausgetragene Meinungsverschiedenheiten persönlich zu nehmen. Ich heiße ja nicht Henryk M. Broder oder Ingo Langner.

Ich bin meinen konservativen Freunden schon deshalb nicht böse, weil ich von dem Grundsatz des großen Sam Goldwyn überzeugt bin: „There is no such thing as bad publicity.“ Jedenfalls hat mein Buch bei Amazon.de einen Sprung gemacht, der vielleicht auch auf die Intervention der beiden zurückzuführen ist. Ein weiterer Grund ist: ich bin eben ein netter Mensch.

Wie gesagt, ich bin nicht böse über böse Kritiken; verstört bin ich darüber, dass beide Kritiker es nötig fanden, ad hominem zu argumentieren, also ein Mittel zu verwenden, das sie selbst zu verabscheuen vorgeben, und das nach konservativem Selbstverständnis auch nicht statthaft ist. Nein, Quatsch, ich bin nicht verstört; denn ich habe selten erlebt, dass sich Konservative an ihre eigenen Grundsätze gehalten hätten. Die größten Vertreter von Familienwerten sind notorische Ehebrecher, die größten Schwulenfeinde sind heimliche Schwule, und so könnte man den Katalog konservativer Werte durchdeklinieren, einschließlich des Faktums, dass die drei größten „Konservativen“ der Nachkriegszeit – Adenauer, Reagan und Thatcher – ja nicht konservativ waren, sondern revolutionär. Was mich mit ihnen versöhnt. Aber nun zu unseren Autoren.

Beide müssen mich unbedingt als eifernden Konvertiten hinstellen: Lütz stellt mich als „Jünger“ Richard Dawkins’ hin, als hätte ich Dawkins’ „Gotteswahn“ gebraucht, um Atheist zu werden; Gauland kommt „leider nicht umhin, auf die linksradikale Vergangenheit des Autors hinzuweisen“, die er zwar überwunden habe, aber „wie so oft bei großen Konversionen“ leider „im Sinne des leidenschaftlichen Umarmens von Kapitalismus, Liberalismus, Demokratie und Marktwirtschaft“. Diese seien dessen „neue Götter“.

Man erkennt die Absicht und ist verstimmt: Atheist zu sein, und gar Dawkins zu mögen, gilt in Deutschland – anders als in England, wo es sogar innerhalb der Staatskirche eine agnostische Tradition gibt, und wo Dawkins zu den angesehensten Professoren der Universität Oxford gehört – immer noch als irgendwie anrüchig. Ein „Jünger“ ist jemand, der nicht selbst denkt. Kapitalismus, Liberalismus, Demokratie und Marktwirtschaft zu „umarmen“, ist fast noch schlimmer als Atheist und Darwinist zu sein, und eine „linksradikale Vergangenheit“ – in England Ausweis selbstständigen Denkens, siehe Orwell, Koestler, Berlin, Popper usw. usf. – gilt hier als Beweis von Charakterschwäche und macht einen des Achtundsechzigerturms verdächtig. Nein, man sollte möglichst immer in der Jungen Union gewesen sein, immer irgendwie an den christlichen Gott geglaubt haben, immer irgendwie skeptisch gegenüber „Kapitalismus, Liberalismus, Demokratie und Marktwirtschaft“ gewesen sein (aber nicht linksradikal, gell): sonst ist man irgendwie nicht ganz koscher.

Womit ich bei Alexander Gauland bin, dessen Text mich mehr geärgert hat als jener von Manfred Lütz. Dass mich Gauland mit Heine und Harden vergleich, schmeichelt natürlich. Ist es aber Zufall, dass diese beiden Juden sind? Der Artikel ist illustriert mit einem Bild, auf dem Papst Benedikt XVI dem israelischen Staatspräsidenten Schimon Peres die Hand gibt: Was, bitte sehr, hat das mit meinem Buch zu tun? Es sei denn, man will „dem Juden“ Posener zeigen, dass auch „sein“ Staatspräsident dem Papst wohl gesonnen sei. Nun gut, vermutlich hat Alexander Gauland mit der Illustration nichts zu tun; das war die Redaktion von DeutschlandRadio Kultur. Die jedenfalls auch den Eindruck bekommen haben muss, hier ginge es darum, den deutschen Papst gegen einen jüdischen Angriff zu verteidigen. Und dann: Alexander Gauland und ich kennen uns lange genug, um wenigstens unsere Namen richtig schreiben zu können; er schreibt aber durchweg „Posner“. Immerhin steht „Posener“ auf dem Buchdeckel. Wie genau hat er also gelesen, bevor er seinem Zorn freien Lauf ließ?

Nichts für Ungut. Mit Manfred Lütz bin ich auf der Buchmesse zum Kaffee verabredet; mit Alexander Gauland werde ich sicher bald wieder in der Potsdamer „Ratswaage“ essen gehen. Die andere Wange, nicht wahr. Christen halten sie selten hin, Nichtchristen dafür umso öfter. Und meine Kritik an Benedikt war konservativer – im Sinne des konservativen Anspruchs, anständig zu sein – als diese konservative Kritik jener Kritik.

Link: Der anmaßende Papst, von Alan Posener, Frankfurter Rundschau, 15.10.2009

Die in HIRAM7 REVIEW veröffentlichten Essays und Kommentare geben nicht grundsätzlich den Standpunkt der Redaktion wieder.


Human Rights and the Rule of Law in China

October 10, 2009

Elizabeth Economy, expert on China-U.S. relations and Chinese domestic and foreign policy, testified before the Congressional-Executive Commission on China. She discussed China’s current environmental challenges and implications for U.S.-China relations.

Elizabeth Economy – Director, Asia Studies, Council on Foreign Relations

Statement Prepared for the Congressional-Executive Commission on China

October 7, 2009, Room 628 Dirksen Senate Office Building, 2:00 pm

Mr. Chairman and distinguished Members of the Commission, it is my pleasure to have the opportunity to discuss China’s efforts in the realm of human rights, the rule of law and the environment and the prospects for U.S.-China cooperation on this critical issue.

Introduction

Over the past five to seven years, China’s leaders have become increasingly concerned about the impact of the environment on the country’s future. Twenty of the world’s thirty most polluted cities are in China; over half of the country’s population drinks contaminated water on a daily basis; and more than twenty-five percent of the land is severely degraded or desertified. As China’s Minister of Environmental Protection Zhou Shengxian acknowledged in 2007, “Pollution problems have threatened public health and social stability and have become a bottleneck for sound socio-economic development.”

Much of China’s environmental challenge stems from the very rapid and unfettered growth of the past thirty years. The “growth at all costs” model of development has exerted a profoundly negative impact on the country’s air, water and land quality and further transformed China into a major global polluter. The country now ranks as the world’s chief contributor to global climate change, ozone depletion, the illegal timber trade, and pollution in the Pacific.

Yet the inability of China’s leaders to turn this devastating environmental situation around—and the environment is frequently mentioned as a “top” priority by President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao—has as much to do with failings in governance as with economic interests. China has passed well over 100 environmental laws and hundreds of regulations. The challenge rests in effectively implementing these laws and regulations, a process that is seriously impeded by a lack of transparency, rule of law and official accountability.

Whether China’s leaders are able to incorporate better governance practices into their system matters enormously not only for the health and welfare of the Chinese people but also for the rest of the world. If China cannot enforce its current environmental laws and regulations, there is little reason to believe that it will be able to respond effectively to a challenge such as global climate change.

The Nature of the Challenge

China’s leaders are concerned about the country’s environment above all because it is limiting opportunities for future economic growth, harming the health of the Chinese people, and has become one of the leading sources of social unrest throughout the country.

The economic challenges are most direct. Over the past several years, the Chinese media have reported on a number of environment-induced annual economic losses: desertification costs the Chinese economy about $8 billion, in addition to water pollution costs of $35.8 billion, air pollution costs of $27 billion and weather disaster and acid rain costs of $26.5 and $13.3 billion respectively.

All told, the Ministry of Environmental Protection estimates that environmental pollution and degradation cost the Chinese economy the equivalent of ten percent of GDP annually. Regionally, the impact is even more devastating. The prawn catch in the Bohai Sea, for example, has dropped by ninety percent over the past decade and a half as a result of pollution and overfishing. In Qinghai, over two thousand lakes and rivers have simply dried up over the past two decades, contributing to significant lost opportunities for industrial growth.

These economic costs are compounded by a set of mounting public health problems. In a survey of thirty cities and seventy-eight counties released in spring 2007, the Ministry of Health blamed worsening air and water pollution for dramatic increases in the incidence of cancer throughut the country: a nineteen percent rise in urban areas and a twenty-three percent rise in rural areas since 2005.

About 700 million people in China drink water that is contaminated with human or animal waste, and according to the Ministry of Water Resources, 190 million drink water that is so contaminated that it is dangerous to their health.

Taken together, these economic and health problems are at the root of the rapidly rising public discontent and unrest over the state of the environment. According to Minister Zhou, in 2005, the number of environmental protests topped 50,000.

While some pollution-related protests are relatively small and peaceful, others become violent, even deadly, when demands for change are repeatedly ignored.

In August 2009, for example, several thousand villagers in Shaanxi Province stormed a lead and zinc smelting plant after hundreds of children living near the plant tested positive for excessive levels of lead in their blood.Of these, 154 were so sick that they had to be admitted to the hospital. The villagers had been complaining for three years about the plant, and although the local government has promised to relocate the affected families, villagers in the relocation sites have noted that their children are similarly afflicted with lead poisoning.

Environmental protest has also been spurred by the Internet. In May 2009, in Shandong Province, a group of residents posted an online petition calling for an investigation of four cyclohexanone chemical plants. The petioners believed that the factories, which had been in operation since a year earlier, were polluting the air and water and contributing to an unusually high number of thyroid cancer cases. The county government initially ignored the petition, arguing that the factories were not allowed to drain wastewater until they met provincial standards and had passed official water quality tests. Over the next month, the petition circulated on web portals such as Baidu and Tianya, collecting an estimated 1,400 signatures.

In an open letter published on Internet forums, one resident even called for a broader “uprising” that might not be successful but would “mark the start of a revolution against a crude regime” and even called for the killing of the Communist Party chief and county director. The author later claimed that more than 5,000 people had signed up for the protest. On June 29, 2009, Premier Wen Jiabao ordered the Shandong officials to investigate the claims and respond to the public.

In addition, the Internet and other forms of telecommunication such as texting have facilitated mobilized protest in urban areas, a phenomenon of only the past two years. There have been significant protests—with up to 10,000 people—in major cities such as Xiamen, Zhangzhou and Chengdu over the planned siting of various large-scale chemical and petrochemical plants. Here, too, violence has occurred in some cases. Notably, in a few of these instances of urban protest, public opposition has been strong enough to lead to a reversal in a government decision. The significance of the urban, middle class protest is that it erupts not “after the fact” in response to a devastating environment-induced economic or public health crisis, but rather in advance of something likely to cause significant public health damage. In a small, but potentially significant, way, therefore, urban protestors have influenced Chinese government policy.

Reform in Environmental Governance

There are a number of reasons for China’s worsening environmental situation and the related proliferating social and economic challenges: a continued priority on economic growth, the pricing of resources that doesn’t support conservation or efficiency, a dearth of political and economic incentives to do the right thing and, most critically, a lack of transparency, official accountability and the rule of law. There is no reliable mechanism for uncovering and dealing with environmental wrongdoing.

To begin with, accurate environmental data are often difficult to obtain. Sometimes it is a matter of capacity. Local environmental officials may simply not have the manpower, transportation or funds to monitor pollution levels at all the sites for which they are responsible. In addition, local officials are often reluctant to provide information that reflects poorly on their leadership, and there is no institutionalized check on the statistics that are provided. One significant central government campaign to evaluate local officials on their environmental performance—the Green GDP campaign—failed in large measure because the Ministry of Environmental Protection could not access the necessary environmental data from a number of recalcitrant provincial leaders. In a few places, such as Jiangsu Province, there are experiments underway with interntational partners to scorecard factories and make the information available publicly. However, ensuring the transparency element of the process has apparently been quite difficult.

Corruption is also a serious problem. Many local officials often ignore serious pollution problems out of self-interest. Sometimes they have a direct financial stake in factories or personal relationships with factory managers. In recent years, the media have uncovered cases in which local officials have put pressure on the courts, the press, or even hospitals to prevent pollution problems and disasters from coming to light. Moreover, local officials often divert environmental protection funds to other endeavors. A recent Ministry of Environmental Protection-supported study, for example, found that fully half of the environmental funds distributed from Beijing to local officials for environmental protection made its way to projects unrelated to the environment.

Recognizing the potential of local officials to subvert or ignore environmental laws and regulations, Beijing has opened the door to the media and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to act as unofficial environmental watchdogs. China’s first environmental NGO, Friends of Nature, was established in 1994, and it was devoted to environmental education and biodiversity protection. Fifteen years later, China has over 3,000 environmental NGOs that play a role in virtually every aspect of environmental protection. Above all, they help bring transparency to the environmental situation on the ground.

These groups help expose polluting factories to the central government, launch internet campaigns to protest the proliferation of large-scale hydropower projects, sue for the rights of villagers poisoned by contaminated water or air, provide seed money to smaller, newer NGOS throughout the country, and go undercover to expose multinationals that ignore international environmental standards. The media are an important ally in this fight: educating the public, shaming polluters, uncovering environmental abuse and highlighting environmental protection successes.

Environmental NGOs are also at the forefront of advancing the still nascent rule of law in China’s political system. In 1998, Wang Canfa, a professor of law at the China University of Politics and Law, established the Center for Legal Assistance to Pollution Victims (CLAPV). The center trains lawyers to engage in enforcing environmental laws, educates judges on environmental issues, provides free legal advice to pollution victims through a telephone hotline, and litigates cases involving environmental law. Between 2001 and 2007, the center trained 262 lawyers, 189 judges and 21 environmental enforcement officials in environmental law.

In addition, Wang has been advising the Chinese government on the establishment of a system of specialized environmental courts. Beginning in late 2007, the Supreme People’s Court established a network of courts that are responsible only for cases regarding environmental protection and the enforcement of environmental regulations. These environmental protection courts seek to address the weak capacity of judges to solve environmental disputes due to lack of expertise and experience, eliminate the challenge faced by plaintiffs in bringing environmental lawsuits, and strengthen the enforcement of judgements against defendants who are influential in local economic matters. Thus far, these courts have been established in three provinces: Guizhou, Jiangsu and Yunnan. The courts have already heard a number of cases: the Kunming Court in Yunnan Province heard twelve environmental law violation cases during the first half of 2009, while the Guiyang court in Guizhou accepted forty-five environmental cases (and ruled on thirty-seven of them) in its first six months.These environmental courts also have the authority to enforce the judgments they issue. More environmental courts are expected to open throughout China as the success of established courts becomes determined. The biggest problem currently confronting the courts is that they do not have enough cases to consider.

Despite the important role that environmental NGOs and the media have come to play in China’s environmental protection effort, many Chinese leaders remain wary of the intentions of these non-governmental actors. Above all, China’s leaders fear the potential that the environment might become a lightning rod for a broader push for political reform. They thus have put in place a byzantine set of financial and political requirements to confine NGO activities within certain boundaries and to enable their close monitoring by authorities.

Misjudging these boundaries can bring severe penalties. Wu Lihong worked for sixteen years to address the pollution in Tai Lake, gathering evidence that forced almost two hundred factories to close. In 2005, Beijing honored Wu as one of the country’s top environmentalists, but in 2006, one of the local governments Wu had criticized, arrested and jailed him on dubious charges of blackmail and fraud. Yu Xiaogang, the 2006 winner of the Goldman Environmental Prize and 2009 winner of the Ramon Magsaysay Award, both for grassroots environmental activism, has been forbidden to travel abroad in retaliation for educating villagers about the potential downsides of a proposed dam relocation in Yunnan Province. A third environmental activist, Tan Kai, has been in jail since 2006. In 2005, Tan established the NGO Green Watch in his home province, Zhejiang, to monitor local officials’ compliance with orders to shut down several polluting factories that had been the sites of serious protests.

Implications for the United States

For the United States, the capacity of China to meet its environmental challenges is only becoming more pressing. If China does not have transparency, accountability or the rule of law within its domestic environmental system, it cannot be relied upon to be a responsible partner to meet the challenge of a global issue such as climate change. It will not possess the capacity to enforce the regulations that will arise from domestic climate legislation nor the transparency to ensure accurate measurement of emissions and emissions reductions. Nor will China be able to devise and implement a system that will ensure that officials who attempt to subvert the legislation will be held accountable. This does not mean that the United States should not move forward to assist China in setting and meeting targets to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. It does suggest, however, that building capacity within China’s system of environmental governance should be a top priority for bilateral cooperation.

There are small-scale efforts already underway within the United States to help China develop such capacity. Over the past two years, the U.S. government has provided $5-$10 million in Development Assistance for programs and activities in the PRC related to democracy, rule of law and the environment. With support from the U.S. government, for example, the American Bar Association has supported both Wang Canfa’s Center for Legal Assistance to Pollution Victims as well as various universities to train public interest lawyers to specialize on the environment and provide expertise to the new environmental courts. Vermont Law School similarly engages partners such as SunYat-sen University to help improve China’s environmental policies, systems and laws. Climate change is also garnering growing interest as an area of cooperation.

The state of California is already pushing forward on several fronts, including enhancing transparency in energy use in Jiangsu Province and fostering interagency cooperation at the local level to address climate change. Still, the majority of interest and attention in the United States and China is focused on the opportunity for technology cooperation and transfer. This technology will only be effective, however, if China has the appropriate political environment to support its use. To tackle an issue of the magnitude of climate change, will require far more of a concerted and coordinated international effort by the United States and its partners to bolster the rule of law, transparency and accountability within China.


General Stanley A. McChrystal’s military strategy in Afghanistan

October 6, 2009
General Stanley A. McChrystal‘s review of U.S. military strategy in Afghanistan, in which the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan calls for an increase in troops, can be read here.

The Washington Post also reports on the military debate over whether to withdraw from isolated rural parts of Afghanistan where U.S. troops are more vulnerable to attack and refocus on urban centers.

Read full story.

President Barack Obama meets with General Stanley A. McChrystal, in the Oval Office at the White House, May 19, 2009.

President Barack Obama meets with General Stanley A. McChrystal, in the Oval Office at the White House, May 19, 2009.


French-Israeli Soldier Gilad Shalit seen for the first time in a Hamas videotape

October 3, 2009

Following Gilad Shalit family’s authorization, video of Gilad Shalit received from Hamas in exchange for prisoner release distributed to news agencies as sign of life, more than three years since soldier captured.


17. Filmfest Hamburg verleiht Ehrenpreis Hamburg Filmfestbesteck 2009

October 1, 2009

Pressemitteilung

Am 1. Oktober 2009 wird das 17. Filmfest Hamburg einen neuen Preis vergeben: Das Hamburg Filmfestbesteck 2009.

Albert Wiederspiel und Lars Becker

Albert Wiederspiel und Lars Becker

Den ersten Ehrenpreis, der in unregelmäßigen Abständen an besonders treue Filmfest-Teilnehmer während des Festivals verliehen werden wird, erhält der deutschen Regisseur und Drehbuchautor Lars Becker („Nachtschicht“, „Rette deine Haut“, „Kanak Attack“).

Filmfestleiter Albert Wiederspiel wird Becker mit dem Ehrenpreis heute um 21.15 Uhr vor der Premiere von „Nachtschicht: Wir sind die Polizei“ im Hamburger Cinemaxx Dammtor überraschen.

„Nachdem Lars Becker fast jedes Jahr mit einem neuen Film bei uns vertreten ist, möchte ich ihm für seine kontinuierliche Treue gegenüber dem Filmfest und dem Spielort Hamburg danken“, so Widerspiels Begründung zur Preisträgerentscheidung.

Lars Becker

Lars Becker

Das Hamburg Filmfestbesteck 2009 beinhaltet vier Silber-Löffel von Robbe und Berking. Jeder Löffel ist mit einem Wort graviert. Zusammen ergeben die Gravuren auf den vier Löffeln die persönliche Widmung „Das Gelbe vom Ei“, welche sich auf den Film von Lars Becker aus dem Jahr 1999 bezieht.

Für Rückfragen wenden Sie sich bitte an das Presseteam im Pressezentrum in der Pony Bar, Allende Platz 1, Hamburg, Telefon 040 – 441 957 46, E-Mail: presse@filmfesthamburg.de.

Weitere Informationen unter www.filmfesthamburg.de.

Das 17. Filmfest Hamburg findet vom 24. September – 3. Oktober 2009 im Abaton Kino, Cinemaxx Dammtor, Metropolis Kino, 3001 Kino und in den Zeise Kinos statt.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 30 other followers