The real world versus fantasy land

Some have the courage to speak the truth while others merely articulate their ideological wishes.

By BARRY RUBIN
August 29, 2010 22:17
BARRY RUBIN

BARRY RUBIN. (photo credit: courtesy)

 
X

Dear Reader,
As you can imagine, more people are reading The Jerusalem Post than ever before. Nevertheless, traditional business models are no longer sustainable and high-quality publications, like ours, are being forced to look for new ways to keep going. Unlike many other news organizations, we have not put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism open and accessible and be able to keep providing you with news and analyses from the frontlines of Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World.

As one of our loyal readers, we ask you to be our partner.

For a symbolic $5 a month you will receive access to the following:

  • A user uxperience almost completely free of ads
  • Access to our Premium Section and our monthly magazine to learn Hebrew, Ivrit
  • Content from the award-winning Jerusalem Repor
  • A brand new ePaper featuring the daily newspaper as it appears in print in Israel

Help us grow and continue telling Israel’s story to the world.

Thank you,

Ronit Hasin-Hochman, CEO, Jerusalem Post Group
Yaakov Katz, Editor-in-Chief

UPGRADE YOUR JPOST EXPERIENCE FOR 5$ PER MONTH Don't show it again

I’m not a big fan of conferences.

There’s nothing more tedious than sitting in a panel where the presentations have interesting titles but are otherwise disappointing. Or listening to a speaker who may be very good but says absolutely nothing you don’t know already.

Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.


However, sometimes you have fascinating experiences which are not exactly on the agenda. Here are three from a conference I attended in Prague a few years ago, each of which contains its own lessons.


Incidentally, the events below weren’t off the record, but names and some details have been omitted since this is about points, not personalities.

1. THE GERMAN parliamentarian was well-dressed, angry and red in the face. He raised his voice in righteous indignation. Why, he complained, were there a number of Israelis at the meeting but no Palestinians? Obviously he thought that he had caught the Czech hosts in some politically incorrect indiscretion.

After he finished his somewhat insulting remarks and sat down, one of the Czechs stood up and explained very politely that plenty of Palestinians had been invited, all expenses paid, and had accepted but had simply not shown up.

That’s something I’ve seen plenty of times.



A lesson: Why get rewarded for deciding not to succeed? Hamas refuses to act peacefully, and then is rewarded for having committed aggression and been soundly defeated as a result (2008-2009). The same applies for Hizbullah (2006). The Palestinian Authority refuses to make peace and then is rewarded for alleged suffering under an occupation it has the power to end when it so wishes.

RECENTLY, A reader made a startling suggestion that I think is a brilliant insight. In this day when not only equal opportunity but equal results are supposedly supposed (yes, that double use is deliberate) to be guaranteed, Israel is being “unfair” at doing so well socially and economically.

In past decades, the failure of a nation to achieve democracy or prosperity would have been attributed to its own choices. That’s a good thing because its people can then realize their mistakes, correct them and succeed. Today, however, failure is often attributed to being a victim of racism, imperialism and pure meanness.

Woody Allen allegedly said (it isn’t clear that he did) that 99 percent of life is showing up. Yes, indeed.

Showing up and performing well.

But in the counter-Calvinism of our time, material achievement is a proof of damnation.

The development theory of the 1950s and ’60s focused on how a country could achieve takeoff to progress and prosperity. It is a model followed nowadays by China, South Korea and some others.

The currently dominant view, at least in intellectual circles and among fashionable dictators and terrorists, is the idea that underdevelopment is not a result of history, culture, society and bad choices but of imperialist exploitation. Instead of reforming yourself, the object is to wage war and other struggles to get the West to hand over the loot. This leads to violence, social intransigence, political stagnation and failure.

But at least it is a popular, rationalized failure.

2. THE POMPOUS American intellectual made a stirring speech about how great things were going in Afghanistan, a country he obviously knew nothing about. He was playing those Washington and academic games in which the lives of distant people are toyed with on the basis of book learning and theories. The fact that this particular fool happened to be conservative didn’t change anything in the usual pattern.

My Afghan friend, who had been analyzing his own country for years and has seen, as he put it, half his family murdered by the communists and the other half murdered by the Islamists, could take no more. He stood up and countered with facts and details. His talk was a devastating response. The police in Kabul wouldn’t leave their barracks to deal with violence. The warlords were out of control. Despite official optimism, Afghanistan was still Afghanistan and American plans were just illusions.

A lesson: One would have thought that the arrogant fool would have been forever silenced by the graphic demonstration that he knew nothing and was speaking nonsense. Of course, such people are never influenced by that kind of humiliation.

I’ve heard and read him since saying similar things. These “masters of the universe,” to use Tom Wolfe’s phrase – historically on the right but nowadays much more common on the left – think about their egos and careers, not the lives being affected by their prattling.

Nevertheless, the experience provided a stirring example of the difference between the real and fantasy worlds, between those who know and those who blow hot air, between those who merely articulate their ideological desires and those who have the courage to speak the truth.

I’m cynical enough to ask “Guess who gets the bigger honors and rewards?” but not so pessimistic or craven to stop trying to do what’s right.

3. IT’S ONE thing to be a pacifist, but quite another to talk like a pacifist while being a high-ranking official in the French Defense Ministry. The well-dressed, debonair and relatively young man was explaining how nothing was worth fighting for, how conflict had to be avoided at virtually any cost. Naturally, he would object to my summary, but it is nonetheless accurate.

I have a friend, though, who loves being provocative in a funny way. In personal life, he is a sweet and considerate person but he loves to play the role of the nasty, arrogant hardliner.

You could see in his glittering eyes and slight smile that he saw a big fat target of opportunity.

And so, as the French bureaucrat proclaimed that no one should go to war without prior approval of the UN, my friend stood up and pointed out that France had intervened dozens of times in Africa – overthrown governments, put down revolts, backed up oppressive regimes – without any reference to the UN.

Up on stage, the French guy was livid, totally losing his temper, rose menacingly and, as I remember it, threatened to punch out my friend.

The spiritual man of peace had instantly turned into a macho man cruising for a bruising. I think someone physically restrained him.

A lesson: When others advise you that you have no right of self-defense, are using excessive force and similar such stuff, note how ferocious they become and totally indifferent to moral or legal considerations when their interests are at stake.

The writer is director of the Global Research in International Affairs Center and editor of Middle East Review of International Affairs and Turkish Studies. He blogs at www.rubinreports.blogspot.com


Related Content

June 25, 2018
Salute to Sharansky

By JPOST EDITORIAL