To find an archived article,
simply click on
Index
and scroll the subject titles, or do a Ctrl-F search
TALLRITE BLOG
ARCHIVE
This archive, organized into months, and indexed by
time
and alphabet,
contains all issues since inception, including the current week.
Daily poll on President Obama’s
popularity; date is
on the charts.
(Click to get the latest version.) Worrying improvement continues!
Change of modus operandi.
As of June 2011, I will post blogs as and when I write them
(ie like every other blogger does) instead of storing them up for one big
bang.
They will however continue to be grouped together per month for archiving
purposes.
The history of modern Israel and
Palestine
through the eyes of a thoughtful protagonist from either side,
with a household lemon tree as their unifying theme.
But it's not entirely honest.
I
was recently given
“The
Lemon Tree”by Sandy Tolan (2006) to read, by a friend who considers I lean too far
in the Zionist direction and so need a bit of extra education.
A delightful read, it feels like a
novel but is in fact the true story of two families, on either side of
the Israel-Palestine divide. So enchanting is the narrative, that
you have to keep pinching yourself to remind yourself that this is not
fiction.
A Jewish family, the Eshkenazis, which
has narrowly escaped annihilation during the Second World War, emigrates
to Israel in 1948 to escape from a still Judaeophobic post-war
Bulgaria.
Meanwhile, the newly created state of
Israel has been immediately attacked by the surrounding Arab countries
bent on its annihilation at birth. But the latter quickly find
themselves on the losing side, and as a consequence in the face of
Israeli military might, many Arabs are expelled or flee from their homes
to become today’s permanent Palestinian refugees. (To date, no-one
agrees on the degree to which this exodus resulted from forced expulsion
or voluntary flight.)
One such family is the Khairis, who
have lived in what is now Israel for centuries; in fear of their lives,
they desert their house, in whose garden the patriarch recently planted
the eponymous lemon tree. Some weeks later, the newly arrived Eshkenazi
family move in to what has become an abandoned property and look with
delight upon the lemon tree.
The book then describes the lives of
the two families as the tensions and further wars between Israel and the
Palestinians develop, and inevitably the sincere and fiery son of one
encounters the thoughtful if bewildered daughter of another. Less
inevitably, they become friends (not lovers) over several decades, who
try to explain and to understand each other’s viewpoint, but
fundamentally without changing their own. Like the fruit of the tree
they are each so fond of, the story is bitter and sweet at the same
time. Eventually, the Eshkenazi daughter moves out of the Khairis'
former home, and with the support of the Khairi son makes the house
available for the education and mutual understanding of Arab and Israeli
children.
This touching and true human
story provides the framework on which the history of Zionism and the
emergence of modern Israel is described against the backdrop of
Palestinian history and nationalism.
Historical facts are copiously
footnoted augmented by a lengthy bibliography (total 113 out of 536
pages) in an attempt to be totally factual and impartial, but this also
provides scope for some subtle deceit. Numerous source documents and
websites are referenced, but it is notably difficult to link particular
statements in the book to particular sources because there is no
one-to-one correlation and the intervening footnotes muddy the water
further.
And yet, as you work your way through
the book, you slowly begin to detect a constant if subtle
pro-Palestinian anti-Israeli bias, one which seems to slowly grow as the
book progresses.
Specific instances are listed and
discussed at the end of this post.
As a result, to form as balanced a view
as possible of the events described some kind of antidote is required.
One
excellent example would be “The
Case for Israel” (2004) by Alan Dershowitz, a famed
American-Jewish law professor at Harvard who writes prolifically on
Israeli matters, but whose name, significantly, appears nowhere in the
pages of references and bibliography in The Lemon Tree. The
title of his book is self-explanatory, and – like The Lemon Tree
– it meticulously supports all its contentions with copious references,
but in this case on a one-to-one basis which makes them easily
verifiable and thus more convincing.
The Arab-Israeli dispute is
characterised by an innate unwillingness of supporters of either side to
seriously study the arguments that favour the other side, perhaps for
fear of being persuaded.
Nevertheless, these two great
readworthy books, taken in conjunction with each other, are an enormous
help to overall understanding of a very complex conflict situation, for
which sadly no end seems in sight.
Some instances of
The Lemon
Tree’s bias
On p45-7 the author recounts the recommendation of John Peel, head of
a “Palestine
Royal Commission”
which reported in 1937, to split Palestine into two states –
for the Arabs Jordan (originally called Trans-Jordan) and a Jewish
one. Yet The Lemon Tree presents this as an affront to
the Arabs, rather than a reneging by the British of Balfour’s
promise in 1917 that the whole area would become the new Jewish
homeland. This was the Arabs’ first rejection of a “two-state
solution”: then as indeed now, they demanded a single Arab (ie
non-Jewish) state. Moreover, nowhere does the author acknowledge
that Jordan is itself an Arab state created for Palestinian Arabs,
albeit under an Iraqi king.
On p48, for the period 1917-48, the League of Nations decreed that
Palestine be administered under a British mandate. The book
dismisses this legal arrangement as “foreign occupation”,
while dishonestly forgetting the preceding 500 years of truly “foreign
occupation” by the Ottoman empire. The British mandate
represented the international community's liberation of Palestine
from the Ottomans.
On p92-93, the notorious Deir Yassin incident of 1948 is described,
in which Israeli soldiers apparently and without reason “massacred
hundreds of women, children and unarmed men”, a storyline that
persists to this day. But there is an alternative explanation – a
fierce battle took place, in which Israelis threw grenades into
houses from which snipers were firing (thus inevitably incurring
civilian casualties). They shot “women” because many
Arab fighters dressed as women were shooting at Israelis to whom
they had supposedly surrendered. Both sides are probably
exaggerating their descriptions, but a purportedly unbiased book
should not confine itself to only one side’s version of events.
The only refugees portrayed are Arabs who left Israel during the
1948 war, the vast majority apparently “forced”. However
there is much dispute about the extent to which they were “forced”
to leave by the Israelis rather than encouraged by their own side or
indeed fled through fear. Furthermore, the similar number of Jewish
refugees driven or fleeing from North Africa at that time are simply
ignored – reference is made (on p185) only to such refugees post
1950. That is not the way to write a balanced account. The reason
that only Palestinian refugees persist to this day is that the Arabs
and their sympathisers want them that way for political purposes and
have refused to give them homes (see my post “Why
Are Palestinian Refugees Still Refugees?”), whereas the
Jewish refugees were quickly absorbed by Israel, America and other
Western states.
The mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini is often mentioned, in
a non-disparaging way. But
his avid support for the Nazis and its Holocaust policy,
his request to Hitler that this be extended to Jews in Palestine
and
his presence in Germany as a guest of Hitler for most of the
Second World War
are quickly glossed over. That the mufti’s nephew was none other
than Yasser Arafat is not even mentioned.
That there are Arab members of the Israeli Knesset is also not
mentioned: Arabs have no comparable parliamentary representation
anywhere else in the Middle East, other than in post-Bush Iraq.
The president of Egypt, Gamel Abdel Nasser, sought to unite all Arab
nations in order to destroy Israel, his objective in
instigating/inciting the Six Day War of 1967. On p209, the book
broadly supports him while remaining silent on his alliance with the
USSR (up to the war).
For the Sabra/Shatilla massacres of hundreds of Palestinians in
those refugee camps, the author on p307 nonchalantly places the
blame on Israel’s commander Ariel Sharon rather than the Lebanese
Christian Phalangists who actually conducted them. Sharon’s sin was
failing to prevent it (for which the Israelis punished him); the
author expresses no outrage towards the actual – Lebanese –
perpetrators.
UN Security Council Resolution 242, which followed the Six-Day War
of 1967 (and incidentally is non-binding), calls for Israel to
withdraw “from occupied territories”, with the definite
article deliberately excluded after long negotiation, in order to
recognize that the 1967 lines are not sacrosanct. On p337 the
author quotes UNSCR 242 but using the words “from theoccupied territories”, a sleight of hand which for an author
as meticulous as Mr Tolan is surely no accident.
On p339, the author writes that in 1994 Hamas “abandoned its
strategy of attacking only Israeli military targets”. This is a
very strange statement as civilians have been targets throughout the
existence of Hamas. (Even Judge Richard Goldstone, the
pro-Palestinian UN investigator of Israel’s invasion of Gaza in 2009
concedes“that the crimes allegedly committed by Hamas were
intentional … its rockets were purposefully and indiscriminately
aimed at civilian targets”.) The author should know better than
to swallow such deceptions.
On p358, the author complains that during the second intifada there
were more Palestinian casualties than Israeli. Similarly on p376.
So what? Once there is conflict, the superior force is bound to
inflict more casualties, indeed that should be its objective or else
there is no point in engaging in conflict.
In 2002 a Palestinian suicide-bomber blew up an Israeli bus killing
eleven and injuring 49. On p367, the author reports – without
giving a source – that Yasser Arafat issued a condemnation. Whether
this is true is moot, but an unbiased author would certainly note
that Arafat frequently said one thing in English for gullible
Western consumption and the complete opposite in Arabic for his
followers. It is inconceivable that he would have condemned such an
act in Arabic.
On p381, the author uses the emotional term “apartheid wall”,
but neglects to explain that it is 80% fence and that it has saved
countless lives by cutting suicide attacks by 90%. Dishonestly, it
is presented as just another humiliation for Arabs by Israelis.
On p386 Mr Tol implies that all of Palestine was
heavily populated by Arabs before Jews arrived. This is simply not
true. Moreover, no account of this conflict should omit the
thousands of years of history that pre-date 1948, in particular who
exactly ran and was living in what is termed Palestine (itself a
political term invented by the Romans to indicate, ironically, a
place where people who live there – ie Philistines – don’t belong).
Here is a
potted history of a region that has been inhabited by Jews
continuously for at least 3,000 years. People who since the 1967
war have come to be called Palestinians are Arabs; Arabs come from
Arabia, an entirely separate area.
The Jews got Israel (via UN Mandate) from the British in 1948,
who took it in 1917 from the Ottomans,
who took it in 1517 from the Egypt-based Mamluks,
who in 1250 took it from the Ayyubi dynasty (descendants of
Saladin, a Kurd),
who in 1187 took it from the Crusaders,
who in 1099 took it from the Seljuk Turks,
who ruled it in the name of the Abbasid Caliphate of Baghdad,
which in 750 took it from the Umayyad Caliphate of Damascus,
which in 661 inherited it from the Arabs of Arabia,
who in 638 took it from the Byzantines,
who in 395 inherited it from the Romans,
who in 63 BC took it from the last Jewish kingdom,
which in 140 BC took it from the Hellenistic Greeks,
who under Alexander the Great in 333 BC took it from the Persian
empire,
which in 639 BC took it from the Babylonian empire,
which under Nebuchadnezzar in 586 BC took it from the Jews (the
Kingdom of Judah),
who - as Israelites - took it in the 12th and 13th centuries BC
from the Canaanites,
who had inhabited the land for thousands of years before they
were dispossessed by the Israelites.
Finally,
there is no evidence that today's Arab Palestinians are descended
from the Canaanites who were completely wiped out in ancient times.
As mentioned, they are from Arabia.
The clue is in the name.
Why did Anglo Irish Bank sell off its highly
profitable, well-capitalised, deposit-rich
Austrian subsidiary, shortly before it strong-armed the Irish Government
into guaranteeing its debts,
bleating that because of lack of liquidity it would otherwise go bust
and bring down the entire Irish banking system and economy with it?
Who are the mysterious depositors whose hundreds of
millions of €uro
are now safely hidden in the Austrian bank sworn to omerta?
There is an interesting little angle to the self-destruction of Anglo
Irish Bank in 2008 that seems to have caught very little public
attention, yet it has implications that are potentially explosive.
Anglo
Irish bank was founded in Dublin in 1964 and plodded on unremarkably
for the next three decades. From 1995 to 2001 it made seven
important acquisitions, of which the first was Royal Trust Bank
(Austria) AG, a Vienna-based bank with a century of history, which it
renamed Anglo Irish Bank (Austria) AG.
Banking Roller-coaster
Anglo Irish then splurged through the Noughties on a wild
and blind rollercoaster of property speculation and property lending in
Ireland and elsewhere, and securitisations, mostly funded by countless
equally speculative billion-€uro loans from major banks in Germany, France,
Belgium, Britain, America and elsewhere. Anglo Irish also developed
the practice of shifting deposits and liabilities in and out of the bank at
annual audit time to deceive the auditors as to the financial rot that was
growing within the bank and also to hide its directors' personal
financial shenanigans.
Meanwhile, the heavily remunerated financial regulators in
all of these domains, who are paid to keep a weather eye on foolish
behaviour by their banks, snored on soundly, awakening only to avail of
bounteous invitations from those selfsame banks to dinners, champagne,
sporting tournaments and other worthy jamborees .
Anglo Irish, especially, was on a roll. It was
even
ranked as the world's best performing bank
out of 170, by bank risk management consultants Oliver Wyman at the 2007
World Economic Forum in Davos (though curiously they've since deleted
this chart from
their
site); they had also held up Anglo Irish Bank to others as a banking
“supermodel”.
If you're a senior banker, it
doesn't get much better than this.
But so much for the hubris. Nemesis
arrived in just a year.
Global Financial Collapse
When Lehman Brothers, America's fourth
largest investment bank, suddenly collapsed on 15th September 2008, it
spread disarray throughout the world's financial systems. Ireland was
not immune. Anglo Irish was one of six Irish banks (the others being
Allied Irish Bank, Bank of Ireland, Irish Life and Permanent, Irish
Nationwide Building Society and the Educational Building Society) whose
creditors started calling in their loans, but whose hugely over-extended
balance sheets, built on smoke and mirrors, were hopelessly unable to meet
these demands.
So it was that on the Sunday night
of 28th/29th September, a phalanx of Irish bank CEOs , all of them in a
state of profound panic, raced to the Government Buildings in Dublin's
Merrion Street, demanding an immediate meeting with the Taoiseach Brian
Cowen and his Finance Minister Brian Lenihan (who had been in Cabinet
barely a year).
Mr Cowen (with the delicious nickname Biffo - Big Ignorant F**ker
From Offaly) was a small-town solicitor who never practiced and
Mr Lenihan was a barrister who practiced law for only five years;
both were dynastic politicians who entered parliament relatively young
(24, 37) as replacements TDs (MPs) when their respective fathers (also
TDs) died. In other words, neither had any training or experience
in finance or economics or indeed had ever had to suffer the vagaries of
the world of private business; neither had ever created a single job nor
had to meet a payroll. Indeed, the Irish Cabinet was stuffed with
such minor lawyers, pub-owners, farmers, teachers; the only minister
with any actual real-world business experience was the Environment
minister from the Greens,
Eamon Ryan, and all he had done was run a
bicycle shop
for a few years.
Bank Guarantee
So the banking CEOs told Biffo and Mr
Lenihan that the their banks had run out of money and - crucially - out of
the associated liquidity otherwise afforded by deposits, and were incapable
of meeting their financial obligations. Therefore the banks and
Ireland's entire banking system would collapse the following Monday morning
unless the State guaranteed all their creditors - all deposits (retail,
commercial, institutional and interbank), covered bonds, senior debt and
dated subordinated debt (lower tier II). Otherwise, they said, there
would be no money in the ATMs, and no money to pay anyone's salary - in the
public sector in particular. Mayhem would ensue as people across the
land tried to force banks to hand back their deposits. Money and investment
would flee the country, which would be instantly bankrupted.
Poor Biffo and Brian. Picture
the scene. They had no idea what the bankers were talking about,
and from their position of ignorance no way to argue with or against
them. Faced with a situation for which they were utterly
untrained, inexperienced and unprepared, they were completely bamboozled
and underwater. What was being demanded was a financial commitment
of taxpayers' money of greater dimensions than had ever been made in the
history of the State, or indeed any state if considered on a per capita
basis.
So they discussed this in Cabinet.
Only they
didn't. It was in the middle of the night and their
Cabinet colleagues were in bed, so they phoned
them. Did they
demand that they drive
immediately to the office because we have to
make
the most momentous decision in the history
of the state? No they
did not. The Cabinet
members were allowed to take individual calls
at
home, give their considered (!) opinion and grant
their hallowed
approval, without ever bothering
to get their backsides out of bed.
So Biffo and
Brian were not only ignorant of the technicalities
of the
issues, but equally ignorant of how to
orchestrate a tremendously
important cabinet
discussion and determination.
This part of the post was written
before the ~
sad news that Brian Lenihan died of pancreatic
cancer on 10th June at the young age of just 52.
He was an honourable and
honest man who
did his best, while knowing he was
under a death sentence due to his illness.
This does not alter the fact
that he was
unsuited and ill-equipped for
the finance ministry that was thrust upon him.
May he rest in peace.
But that's how the
deed was done, how the Irish Government kowtowed to the
self-interested will of a bunch of frightened, scabrous bankers, on that
fateful night, a night that will live in infamy, a night that today's
Irish children, babies, foetuses and the yet unconceived will pay for
through their sweat and treasure until and beyond their old age.
Omerta
But this post is not about that
particular scandal, but about another that took place within Anglo Irish
Bank, the worst offender of all the banks, barely three weeks earlier,
on 5th
September 2008.
That day, in a move that to date has
received
scant media attention, Anglo Irish signed a virtually irrevocable
sales
agreement with the Valartis Group, which
describes itself as
“a Swiss financial boutique with
significant private banking business as well as asset management and
investment banking operations”.
In other words a bank which prides itself on a strict code of Sicilian-style
omerta. Under the agreement, Valartis
bought Anglo Irish Bank (Austria) AG for €141 million, but as an
extra inducement Anglo Irish kindly (and inexplicably) lent the wealthy
Valartis €24m.
Valartis renamed its new aquisition Valartis Bank (Austria)
AG, which to this day remains a Vienna-based Austrian bank. It
reminds its depositors that
“Austrian Banking Law contains comprehensive rules regarding
Bank Secrecy ... to protect the bank's clients and provide for the
prosecution of bank employees if they divulge confidential information
to third parties. We take great care to ensure that our clients ... can
fully benefit from the Austrian Advantage”.
Moreover
it “protect[s] and grow[s our clients'] wealth
[with] professionalism and discretion
”.
In other words, the omerta continues.
Since Anglo Irish, according to p72 of its
2010 Annual Report, ended up with a profit of €49m on its
transaction, it might argue
that this was a worthwhile deal for a bank in dire financial straits.
Private Deposits
Yet that Austrian subsidiary was holding no
less than €570m in
private deposits, and unlike its parent did hardly any lending -
just €34m. This was at a time when lack of liquidity (ie lack of
deposits) was the principal reason that Anglo Irish was just three weeks
away from total collapse, only to be averted by massive intervention by the
hapless Irish taxpayer at the hands of a financially illiterate Government.
Moreover the subsidiary was also exceedingly well
capitalised, with €92m in capital, almost five times the statuary
requirement of €19 million, with a very strong capital ratio of 39%.
Unsurprisingly, it was also profitable, delivering an 18% increase in
pre-tax profits to €13˝m for the year to
30th September 2008.
Who knew all this? Well,
eight of the Anglo Irish top brass sat on its supervisory board,
including chairman Sean Fitzpatrick himself, former finance director Willie
McAteer and former chairman Peter Murray. These eight far outnumbered the
two lonely Austrians sitting on the management board.
Is it conceivable, therefore, that the senior managers of
Anglo Irish - in particular Mr Fitzpatrick (right) and CEO David Drumm (left) - were unaware of how close their bank was sailing to the edge of
Niagara Falls? That disaster was only a few weeks away? If you believe that,
you believe in the tooth fairy!
So why would they sign away a bank that was deposit-rich
with its juicy €570m, highly liquid, strongly capitalised and very
profitable? Or more pertinently, who, exactly, are those depositors
who placed over half a billion €uro in one of the most secretive banking
jurisdictions in the world, never mind in the EU? Deposits that
quietly broke free of any control or oversight by Anglo Irish or by the
Irish State, to end up in the distant embrace of Valartis?
As Cicero so perspicaciously asked over two thousand years
ago,
“cui bono?”; who gains from such an arrangement? Or in more
recent times, we could turn to the 1976 movie “All
the Presidents Men” where Deep Throat memorably advised journalist
Bob Woodward that if he wanted to understand the Watergate mystery he should
“follow the money”.
Unfortunately, thanks to Austrian and Swiss banking
omerta, we cannot “follow the money”; we can only speculate.
But
“cui bono?” enhances our speculation.
Clearly any Irish person
who had, say, a
hundred million €uro deposited with Anglo Irish bank or a foreign
subsidiary steeped in omerta
and
who knew
(perhaps as part of a favoured
“golden
circle”)
that, if the Austrian subsidiary were to be excluded from the equation,
lack of liquidity was driving the rest of Anglo Irish to the verge of
insolvency and/or effective nationalisation,
would very much want to put such deposits well beyond the
reach of official Irish eyes and hands. Especially if, for example, you were
- like Messrs
Fitzpatrick and
Drumm - heavily indebted, on a personal basis, to Anglo Irish and
others.
What better route, therefore, than to hurriedly hive off
that subsidiary (along with your savings as part of its sumptuous
half-billion deposit book) to a wholly separate organization distinguished
by a similar culture of omerta, even if it meant throwing in, say,
€24m as a sweetener.
So who would such depositors comprise? I have no idea,
but we can make speculative guesses, on the basis of both
“cui bono?” and “follow the money”.
For starters, could the list include these men and perhaps
some of their closest friends:
Sean
Fitzpatrick?
Willie McAteer?
Peter Murray?
David Drumm ?
Members of the
unnameable ten-person
“golden
circle”
to whom, after erstwhile billionaire Sean Quinn had suddenly to put up
for sale his 10% ownership, Anglo Irish lent €451m to buy up those
Anglo-Irish shares in order to prevent a share price collapse,
who include
Gerry Gannon?
Joe O'Reilly?
Seamus Ross?
Jerry Conlan?
Definitely not! As Irish resident citizens taxable on
their worldwide income, they would be obliged to reveal their deposits in Valartis' Austrian subsidiary to the fiscal authorities, in order to declare
the resultant interest and dividends for taxation purposes. Since
there is no public knowledge of such revelations, clearly none of them
belong on the list.
Do they?
Bomb Ticks On
This is not (yet) a scandal, but if more investigative
journalists were to do their job (ha!) it could quickly explode.
Those
deposits of €570m,
which since
September 2008 have been safely hidden away from prying eyes,
beyond the reach
of Irish authorities, and
whose removal
contributed to the effective destruction of Anglo Irish bank and
in turn the
beggary of the Irish nation,
belong to some real, and smugly relieved, people.
I wonder will we ever know who they really are. This
is surely a ticking Anglo Irish bomb.
Aid to the developing world is
unaffordable to Ireland (and other bankrupt states) and anyway always does
more harm than good over the long term, for all parties.
I was invited last week (30th May) to appear as an audience
member on a weekly
Frontline
programme of political discussion put out by RTÉ, the Irish State
broadcaster. The theme was twofold:
the damage
Ireland's budgetary cutbacks are doing to the care of disabled people,
and
whether Ireland should curtail its
€669 million aid budget (2011)**, which is 0.52% of Gross National
Income, or indeed meet its
UN Millennium Development pledge to increase this to 0.7% of GNI by
2015.
**(Interestingly,
Ireland's aid budget is equivalent to a
1˝% reduction in the massive interest it is paying on its bailout to
the IMF and ECB. Meanwhile, its political leaders are desperately
and vainly seeking a mere 1% cut).
My invitation arose from a
letter I had published in the Irish Times about poverty-reduction, way
back in 2005. Extraordinarily, the relevant RTE researcher keeps such
stuff on file and is able to retrieve it, and it's not the first time he has
referred back to my ancient witterings.
With data culled from a blog post last March (“The
Madness of Voluntary Redundancy”)
on redundancy and another from 2004 which featured Ethiopia (“Multiple
Mass Killers”),
I made the following points, more or less, in two goes with the microphone.
I was astonished at the amount of positive feedback I received after the
programme, from both audience members and privately, expressing agreement
with the thrust of what I said:
For every FOUR €uro Ireland spends, it borrows ONE €uro,
and at exorbitant rates. This will have to be paid back not by today’s
feckless adults under whose watch it was incurred but by their children, grandchildren, foetuses and the
yet unconceived, until their own old age. This is a monstrous crime
against children.
It is equally monstrous to wilfully add to this
burden by gifting money Ireland does not possess to other people.
And that is to not even point out that aid to the
developing world has proved to be an utter disaster. Other than sporadic
pockets of success, there is absolutely nothing to show for the hundreds
of billions that have been poured into poor countries over the past 60
years since the Second World War, other than to instil and propagate a
dependency culture and fill the pockets of kleptocratic tyrants.
Take Ethiopia. In the 20 years after Bob Geldof
and Live Aid in 1985,
the population of doubled (from 34m to 68m),
annual income per head almost halved (from $190
to $108),
food production per head went down by two-thirds
(from 450 kg to 140 kg) and
the number fed by charities doubled (from 7m to
14m).
In other words, Ethiopia's personal misery at least
doubled, and by some counts quadrupled.
For Ethiopia’s problem was never lack of money, it
was lack of democracy under successive tyrants and lack of open markets.
It is the story of Africa.
The Western world has made donations of taxpayers’
money (a mere one trillion dollars, actually) to assuage their guilt for
prohibiting free trade access of third world producers to protected
Western markets.
My contributions may be found
here at Minute 39:44-41:15 and 51:40-52:30.
There is a reason that aid can never do more than trim at
the edges of poverty, and that reason is human nature.
Imagine you are the chief of a jungle village mired in
poverty and disease. One day, an Irish aid worker arrives and offers
help. Perhaps he/she will
drill a well for
clean water,
teach villagers
about elementary hygiene,
arrange periodic
nursing visits for rudimentary health care,
set up a small
open-air school for reading, writing and arithmetic,
provide
agricultural advice and fertilisers that improve yields,
build tracks to
make it easier to bring produce to market.
After say five years, the Irish aid worker sees what
fantastic progress has been made. Not only are the villagers healthier
and wealthier, but they have learnt to do most of the above list by
themselves. So the aid worker says great, what a wonderful success,
this village can now stand on its own two feet. My job is done, so
it's now time for me to move the aid to the next village to work a similar
miracle.
Well, what do you think the village chief is going to think
when he learns the aid flow will stop and another chief will get it instead.
He will be enraged; he will do everything he can to keep the aid flowing.
In fact, not being stupid, he will have long seen this coming and so will
have made sure that his villagers are NOT healthier and wealthier. There
may be many ways of doing this, but the simplest is to just pocket the aid
himself. That's merely human nature. (Even aid workers themselves
can be similarly tempted.)
Whenever you create incentives for certain types of
behaviour, it is certain you will get more of it, whether good or bad.
That is why long-term aid can never work and has never worked other than in
isolated pockets. Foreign aid destroys, not enhances, wealth - and by
the way the indomitable Melanie Philips
thinks so too, as
does the IMF. Dambisa Moyo, a renowned former Goldman Sachs economist,
declares that
“aid is an unmitigated political, economic and humanitarian
disaster”.
Foreign aid is a main reason why Africa is a grimmer place
for the vast majority of Africans today than when it was under the white
colonialists' thumb during the last century.
And it is equally why open markets and free trade
always increase wealth, because the incentive - and the capability -
then lies in producing goods that customers want and then selling them. This would work equally
for Africans if only those former white colonialists in Europe and America
would allow it to. But no, they prefer to close their lucrative
markets and subsidise their own loss-creating industries (especially farming) in
a myriad of ways. This keeps the poor poor not only the developing
world over which so many crocodile tears are shed. It also keeps the
poor poor in the West itself by punishing success, rewarding failure and
pushing up prices (to which of course the poor are the most vulnerable).
If the current recession forces democratic countries to cut
back on their foreign aid and to open their markets to cheaper food and
goods from the developing world, it will be ultimately to the benefit of
both parties. Sadly, the second half of such a bargain is unlikely to
be fulfilled. Too many vested interests.
Incidentally, thousands of charities, big and small,
also have an enormous incentive to keep poverty going because relieving
it is their core business. Without poverty, they would have no
raison d'ętre, a disaster for them. None of them will ever however admit this self-evident
truth.
Relieving Gaza
“Siege” Letter to the Irish Times
Fintan Lane of
“Irish
Ship to Gaza”
says the objective of his colleagues and him is
“to non-violently break the
siege of Gaza and to deliver much-needed materials that are banned or
heavily restricted ...”.
Then why not ... simply waltz through the Rafah border with Egypt, which
the new Egyptian regime has kindly opened ...
Political stunts not the way to end Gaza conflict Online comment an Irish
Times (which responds to the one below)
David Smith and others say that the Jews have no right to be in Israel,
though they have lived there continuously for at least 3,000 years.
The Jews got it (via UN Mandate) from the British in 1948,
who took it in 1917 from the Ottomans,
who took it in 1517 from the Egypt-based Mamluks ...
Flotilla aims to turn tide on Israel's Gaza policies Online comment to an Irish Times article
{Columnist Claudia] Saba writes: “Describing the myriad harassments to
which the Palestinian population is exposed – be they bombs, hostile
checkpoints or imprisonment – sounds like something out of a Kafka novel
...” Well if you as a Palestinian don't like what Hamas and Fatah are
doing to Palestinians, stop voting them in ...
Argentina's 2001 Default Online comment on an Irish Times article The main message from this Argentina story is
to get your money out now from any bank with the word
“Irish”
or
“Ireland”
in its name. Send it ...
Visit by Head of State Letter to the Irish Times
How churlish of Clare Bourke to ask "Can we afford the visit of
President Obama?". Oh wait, she said Queen Elizabeth. So that's OK then.
Shell and the Argument from Morality
Online Comment on a post moaning about Shell's development
of Ireland's Corrib gasfield This democracy thing is a pain. You vote for people to make laws on
your behalf. They make them. And then they apply them. And if you don't
like them, tough, you have to put up with them until you can persuade
the elected politicians that they should be reversed or ...
Critics who demonised Israel should say sorry Online comment in the Irish Times ... Some people argue that, notwithstanding his admissions of falsehood,
the Goldstone Report nevertheless remains largely intact, since his
admissions apply to only parts of it, much like the curate's egg. But a
better analogy would be the mixing of a few spoonfuls of urine in with a
bottle of fine wine ...
Quote:
“The whole world knows who I am. I am General Ratko Mladic
. . . I defended my people, my country . . . now I am defending
myself. I just have to say that I want to live to see that I
am a free man.”[Yeah, right!]
Ratko Mladic in the UN War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague,
where he faces charges of genocide, war crimes and crimes against
humanity,
as he begins the rest of his life behind bars.
Dominique Strauss Khan, then boss of the IMF,
as he allegedly exercises his droit du seigneur over a hotel
chambermaid.
Quote: “Happily, we live in a country where, thanks to the
presumption of innocence, one cannot show men or women at this stage
of proceedings handcuffed.”
Party leader Martine Aubry, leader of France's Socialist party
is struck by the “deeply humiliating” sight of
party bigwig Dominique Strauss-Khan doing the American perp-walk,
in traditional handcuffs, in New York,
where he is accused of various sexual crimes.
She doth protest too much.
France is a country where suspects can be held without charge
for two years, while an investigating judge takes his
time
to determine whether the accused has a case to answer.
I do not recall Ms Aubrey expressing outrage when Bernie Madoff,
at that time innocent until proven guilty just as DSK is,
underwent a similar perp-walk.
- - - - - B E I N G O F F E N D E D - - - - -
Quote:
“The first applicant may have taken offence at the presence of a
crucifix in classrooms, but the existence of a right ‘not to be
offended’ has never been recognised within the Convention. In
reversing the Chamber's judgment, the Grand Chamber does no more
than confirm a body of settled jurisprudence (notably under Article
10) which recognises that mere ‘offence’ is not something
against which an individual may be immunized by law.”
A remarkable generic judgementby the Grand
Chamber
(ie appeal division) of the European Court of Human Rights
No-one has a right to be protected against
offence.
The atheist complainants,
Ms Soile Lautsi and her children,
had moaned that they were
“offended”
by a Christian Crucifix in an Italian classroom.
President Obama, in Ireland to visit his ancestral village of
Moneygall in Co Offaly, copies the Queen (see below) with a bit of
Irish.
The phrase means his favourite cliché “Yes, we can”.
Curiously, the presidential couple failed to visit
the nearby Offaly village of Ballysheil,
which is Michelle's ancestral village, whence
her Irish forebear
Henry Shields
(or perhaps
Dolphus Shields) emigrated to America.
Once there, he established himself as a slave owner,
and fathered children through one of his black slave-girls, Melvinia
(valued at $475), from whom Michelle is descended.
Perhaps a super-injunction kept Ballyshiel off the visit itinerary.
Quote:
“A Uachtaráin agus a chairde” [“President and
friends”]
Queen Elizabeth II's first public words in
Ireland are in Irish.
“Wow!” whispers President McAleese, her hostess.
Quote ...
Quote:
“While we cannot change the past, we have chosen to change
the future ... [We are] able to bow to the past, but not be
bound by it”
Both President MacAleese and the Queen
choose to look forward during the latter's state visit to Ireland
Morgan Kelly, professor of economics at
University College Dublin
and much respected economic guru,
who correctly predicted Ireland's fiscal crisis - and was ignored.
- - - - - B I N L A D E N - - - - -
Quote:
“It [bin Laden's blood] will remain, with permission
from Allah the Almighty, a curse that chases the Americans and their
agents, and goes after them inside and outside their countries ...
Their happiness will turn into sorrow, and their blood will be mixed
with their tears.”
Statement by Al Qaeda,
to SITE,
a US-based Jihadist monitoring service,
which confirms the death of Osama bin Laden.
Quote: “Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader. He was a mass
murderer of Muslims. His demise should be welcome by all who believe
in peace and human dignity.”
A peculiar assessment by President Obama.
Who else?
- - - - - I S R A E L - - - - -
Quote: “The Palestinian Authority must chose either peace
with Israel or peace with Hamas. There is no possibility of peace
with both.”
Israel's prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu
make the perfectly reasonable case that
since Hamas is committed to the destruction of Israel,
anyone who makes peace with it - as the Palestinian Authority
has apparently just done - de-facto makes war with Israel.
Quote:
“If I had known then what I know now, the
Goldstone Report would have been a different document ...
Civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.”
Richard Goldstone, the (Jewish) judge from
South Africa
who chaired an investigation by the rabidly anti-Semitic UN
“Human Rights Council”
into Operation Cast Lead, Israel's attack on
Gaza 2008/9,
recants his principal finding.
His disgraceful, dishonest, fact-denying report
has done enormous damage to Israel's reputation,
to the delight of its many enemies.
Melanie Philips rightly
skewers the charlatan judge.
But the UK Foreign Office, as ever operating its
policy of low-level anti-Semitism,
does not accept his recantation
-
- - - - U S A - - - - -
Quote: “If you're complaining about the price of gas and
you’re only getting 8 miles a gallon, you know [LOL], you
might want to think about a trade-in.”
President Obama's answer to oil prices soaring
over $100 a barrel.
Interestingly, you would have to
go back forty years
to find gas-guzzlers that made even 10-15 miles a gallon, never mind
8.
And anyway, how, for cash-strapped citizens,
is buying a new car a solution to high fuel prices?
Or else by “trade-in” Mr Obama was
simply
referring to next year's presidential election?
Now that would be a solution!
Quote:
“Do we use the term ‘intervention’, do we use
‘war’, do we use ‘squirmish’; what is it?”
Sarah Palin shows that Mr Obama is not the only nutty politician in
America.
She decides to invent a new word
as she philosophises over
the Obama Administration's reluctance
to use the word ‘war’ when talking about
the aerial attacks against Q'Daffy's forces over Libya
Quote:
“We do not have time for this kind of silliness. We’ve got better stuff to do. I’ve got better stuff to do. We’ve got
big problems to solve.”
President Obama, on being forced by Donald
Trump to release
his so-called
“long-form”
(ie genuine) birth certificate,
which at last proves that he was in fact born in the
United States,
rather than in Kenya has his grandmother averred.
And what exactly were his “better stuff [and] big problems
to solve”?
Well, immediately after his press conference,
he flew
to Chicago for an Oprah Winfrey show.
Then he flew to New York for three fundraisers.
These events were obviously much
“better [and] bigger”
than the “silliness” of finally establishing,
two long years into his presidency,
his fundamental eligibility to be America's president.
In fairness, he was also approving the
assassination of Osama bin Laden.
- - - - - F R A N C E - - - - -
Quote:
“The art of philosophy is only worthwhile if it is an art
of war ... Philosophy is war not debate”.
Bernard-Henri Lévy, France's celebrity philosopher,
who was the person who bullied Sarkozy
into the whole Libyan bombing campaign.
Sarkozy in turn bounced Cameron and Obama into
it.
Why don't we get screwball philosophers like this
in the Anglosphere?
“The Lemon Tree”, by Sandy
Tol (2006),
is a delightful novel-style history of modern Israel and Palestine told
through the eyes of a thoughtful protagonist from either side, with a
household lemon tree as their unifying theme.
But it's not
entirely honest in its subtle pro-Palestinian bias, and therefore needs
to be read in conjunction with an antidote, such as
This examines events which led to BP's 2010 Macondo blowout in
the Gulf of Mexico.
BP's ambitious CEO John Browne expanded BP through adventurous
acquisitions, aggressive offshore exploration, and relentless
cost-reduction that trumped everything else, even safety and long-term
technical sustainability.
Thus mistakes accumulated, leading to terrifying and deadly accidents in
refineries, pipelines and offshore operations, and business disaster in
Russia.
The Macondo blowout was but an inevitable outcome of a BP culture that
had become poisonous and incompetent.
However the book is gravely compromised by a
litany of over 40 technical and stupid
errors that display the author's ignorance and
carelessness.
It would be better
to wait for the second (properly edited) edition before buying.
As for BP, only a
wholesale rebuilding of a new, professional, ethical culture will
prevent further such tragedies and the eventual destruction of a once
mighty corporation with a long and generally honourable history.
This is
nonagenarian Alistair Urquhart’sincredible story of survival in the Far
East during World War II.
After recounting a
childhood of convention and simple pleasures in working-class Aberdeen,
Mr Urquhart is conscripted within days of Chamberlain declaring war on
Germany in 1939.
From then until the
Japanese are deservedly nuked into surrendering six years later, Mr
Urquhart’s tale is one of first discomfort but then following the fall
of Singapore of ever-increasing, unmitigated horror.
After a wretched
journey Eastward, he finds himself part of Singapore’s big but useless
garrison.
Taken prisoner when Singapore falls in
1941, he is, successively,
part of a death march to Thailand,
a slave labourer on the Siam/Burma
railway (one man died for every sleeper laid),
regularly beaten and tortured,
racked by starvation, gaping ulcers
and disease including cholera,
a slave labourer stevedoring at
Singapore’s docks,
shipped to Japan in a stinking,
closed, airless hold with 900 other sick and dying men,
torpedoed by the Americans and left
drifting alone for five days before being picked up,
a slave-labourer in Nagasaki until
blessed liberation thanks to the Americans’ “Fat Boy” atomic
bomb.
Chronically ill,
distraught and traumatised on return to Aberdeen yet disdained by the
British Army, he slowly reconstructs a life. Only in his late 80s
is he able finally to recount his dreadful experiences in this
unputdownable book.
There are very few
first-person eye-witness accounts of the the horrors of Japanese
brutality during WW2. As such this book is an invaluable historical
document.
+++++
“Culture of Corruption:
Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks, and Cronies”
This is a rattling good tale of the web
of corruption within which the American president and his cronies
operate. It's written by blogger Michele Malkin who, because she's both
a woman and half-Asian, is curiously immune to the charges of racism and
sexism this book would provoke if written by a typical Republican WASP.
With 75 page of notes to back up - in
best blogger tradition - every shocking and in most cases money-grubbing
allegation, she excoriates one Obama crony after another, starting with
the incumbent himself and his equally tricky wife.
Joe Biden, Rahm Emmanuel, Valerie Jarett,
Tim Geithner, Lawrence Summers, Steven Rattner, both Clintons, Chris
Dodd: they all star as crooks in this venomous but credible book.
ACORN, Mr Obama's favourite community
organising outfit, is also exposed for the crooked vote-rigging machine
it is.
+++++
This much trumpeted sequel to
Freakonomics is a bit of disappointment.
It is really just
a collation of amusing
little tales about surprising human (and occasionally animal) behaviour
and situations. For example:
Drunk walking kills more people per
kilometer than drunk driving.
People aren't really altruistic -
they always expect a return of some sort for good deeds.
Child seats are a waste of money as
they are no safer for children than adult seatbelts.
Though doctors have known for
centuries they must wash their hands to avoid spreading infection,
they still often fail to do so.
Monkeys can be taught to use washers
as cash to buy tit-bits - and even sex.
The book has no real
message other than don't be surprised how humans sometimes behave and
try to look for simple rather than complex solutions.
And with a final
anecdote (monkeys, cash and sex), the book suddenly just stops dead in
its tracks. Weird.
++++++
A remarkable, coherent attempt by Financial Times economist Alan Beattie
to understand and explain world history through the prism of economics.
It's chapters are
organised around provocative questions such as
Why does asparagus come from Peru?
Why are pandas so useless?
Why are oil and diamonds more trouble
than they are worth?
Why doesn't Africa grow cocaine?
It's central thesis
is that economic development continues to be impeded in different
countries for different historical reasons, even when the original
rationale for those impediments no longer obtains. For instance:
Argentina protects its now largely
foreign landowners (eg George Soros)
Russia its military-owned
businesses, such as counterfeit DVDs
The US its cotton industry
comprising only 1% of GDP and 2% of its workforce
The author writes
in a very chatty, light-hearted matter which makes the book easy to
digest.
However it would
benefit from a few charts to illustrate some of the many quantitative
points put forward, as well as sub-chaptering every few pages to provide
natural break-points for the reader.
+++++
This is a thrilling book of derring-do behind enemy lines in the jungles
of north-east Burma in 1942-44 during the Japanese occupation.
The author was
a member of Britain's V Force, a forerunner of the SAS. Its remit was to
harass Japanese lines of
command, patrol their occupied territory, carryout sabotage and provide
intelligence, with the overall objective of keeping the enemy out of
India.
Irwin
is admirably yet brutally frank, in his
descriptions of deathly battles with the Japs, his execution of a
prisoner, dodging falling bags of rice dropped by the RAF, or collapsing
in floods of tears through accumulated stress, fear and loneliness.
He also provides some fascinating insights into the mentality of
Japanese soldiery and why it failed against the flexibility and devolved
authority of the British.
The book amounts to
a very human and exhilarating tale.
Oh, and Irwin
describes the death in 1943 of his colleague my uncle, Major PF
Brennan.