Work as if you live in the early days of a

Better Nation

Archive for category International

The pros and cons of #operationhilarity

Feb 29

Posted by James in Elections, International | 18 Comments

Yesterday Michigan voted and Mitt Romney duly squeaked the state of his birth ahead of Rick Santorum, someone assumed previously to be a joke – partly because of Dan Savage’s magnificent redefinition of his name, and partly because he’s the quintessential wingnut.

He’s come out against education, he remains a total homophobe, and he’s gone beyond opposition to abortion and into opposition to contraception, which he described as “a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.” Rick, if God didn’t want us to use johnnies, he wouldn’t have let us work out how.

He also lost his own Senate seat in 2006 by 18 points. Normally getting humped in your home state isn’t the perfect setup for a run at the Presidency. Oh, and his sartorial sense reminds me of Ned Flanders, although even Ned would never lose the sleeves.

The vote in Michigan was closer than would have been imagined a few months ago, though, partly because of the momentum with which he’s been coming from behind, and partly because of #operationhilarity.

The Republicans themselves pressed to open up their nomination process in Michigan to independents and Democrats and make it an open primary. The Democrat blogs and network mavens, having no use for a Democratic vote in Michigan, pushed for a vote for Santorum instead.

The Daily Kos launched the idea two weeks ago as #operationhilarity. The logic is that someone so grotesquely odd and out of touch with the middle of American politics can’t possibly win a general election, so make him the Republican candidate and ta-da! Obama cruises to a second term. Also, watching Rick crash and burn would be truly first class entertainment. As Markos put it, “it’s freaking hilarious. I mean, Rick Santorum? Really? The Republicans have offered up this big, slow, juicy softball. Let’s have fun whacking the heck out of it.”

Rick even played along, having his campaign robo-call blue-collar “Reagan Democrats” to encourage them to vote for him. The combined result? Democrat participation up to 10%, and they split for Santorum more than three to one.

Mitt won anyway, but was this a good idea by Democrats?

On one level it illustrates the absurdity of the American electoral system. However, no amount of doing so seems to lead to change. In fact, the recent changes to campaign finance laws confirm the trend, as put by Michael Spence to the New York Times, that we’ve seen “an evolution from one propertied man, one vote; to one man, one vote; to one person, one vote; trending to one dollar, one vote.”

Another perspective, set out in a first class article by Jonathan Chait, says this is the Republican right’s last chance to hold the line on social issues against the coming tide of young people, gays, Hispanics etc. Obama dispatching Santorum would be a clear victory in the 1990s-and-onward reheated version of the 1960s culture wars, true.

But so too would Obama-Romney. Mitt’s made himself into a staunch wingnut that he now has to deny his best achievement in every debate. The outcome would surely be the same, ideologically and practically.

The downside of Rick Santorum being his party’s nominee might be more subtle. He’d bring the far-right theocrats out to vote in larger numbers in November, and the coat-tails effect on House and Senate races would mean disproportionately more of that particular crowd would get elected. No-one goes out to vote Republican in November because they’re passionate about Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney probably isn’t even passionate about himself. But a post-Santorum Congress could be filled with some pretty unpleasant material indeed.

pic is Rick made of gay porn

Nous Sommes Tous Américains

Sep 11

Posted by Aidan in Democracy, International, Society | 31 Comments

Like most folk, I have a very clear memory of when I heard. One of those bright, chilly September days. I was sitting at my desk in the small meeting room me and my team mates had commandeered as an office. The phone rang, my wife was on the line, wasn’t unusual for her to call around then. We’d gotten back from visiting her parents in Boston a couple of weeks before and she was still shifting back into a UK sleeping pattern.

“Somebody’s flown a plane into the world trade centre”

“What? Like a microlight?”

“No, a plane. A big one. Go find a TV.”

I went through to the kitchen, where my two team mates were playing pool and told them what happened. I remembered somebody had moved the TV from the kitchen to the main open plan office for Wimbledon and it had never been moved back. The person who’d done it had probably been laid off in the round of redundancies that had happened while I was on holiday, the dot com collapse was in full flow and I’d found out maybe 20 of my friends had lost their jobs in back channel email.

BBC1 had interrupted it’s programming and was showing News 24. I’d never seen that before, usually it didn’t start until the wee small hours. It was going to become a familiar sight over the next weeks and years. Smoke was billowing out, the presenter didn’t seem to know much of anything. People started gathering round the small, black CRT with rabbit ear antennae on top of a filing cabinet.

And that’s where the memory starts to fade. A few people asked what was going on, I don’t remember if we watched the second plane hit or if it was after that. I think we did, but it might have been a repeat. I’ve seen that footage so many times over the last 10 years I can’t trust that. I do remember grimly remarking about how my parents-in-law had lunch with us at the airport gate in Boston and thinking how different and relaxed airport security was there compared to the UK. A metal scanner, a bag check.. nobody asked for your boarding pass until you tried to get on the plane.

What I do remember is sitting in the smoking room while the towers burned, calling my wife and chewing over what had happened with the other half dozen regulars in there, and the half dozen more who joined us. It didn’t take long to realise that, regardless of insane project schedules, nothing else was getting done that day.

And so I spent the next few hours alternately smoking and on the internet trying to find friends and family.

I remember getting home and sitting on the floor, having wired up the monitor and keyboard to the server I remember the heat from the computers and the early ADSL modem, and staying up late talking with folk in the US, and smoking. A lot. A friend describing the amount of ash and dust that was billowing past her window in New York.

A few days later we had a company meeting in the kitchen to discuss it. Then now faded memories of Kenya and Yemen were fresh and along with the sorrow for the deaths and the fear of future attacks there was a dread of what the response would be and what that would mean for the people in the countries the US would retaliate against.

Kate adds:

It’s one of those memories where everyone will remember where they were when it happened.  I was at work, in a meeting.  A very important meeting with very important people.  All the way through, our mobiles were humming and vibrating.  We ignored them.  Important stuff to discuss, two hours worth, which in the end produced some very worthwhile results for some of Scotland’s most marginalised people.

The boss’s landline rang as soon as she switched the ringer back on.  Her boyfriend was almost incoherent.  He worked in high finance and had business associates in the towers.  Effectively the message was turn the TV on, the World Trade Centre is on fire.

I’d left the room at this point, not wishing to intrude on a private conversation.  A shriek beckoned me back.  We stood there in open-mouthed silence, trying to compute the images on the screen with the fragments of information we had.  It was discombobulating actually.  The whole office suddenly whirled, with everyone up from their desks and in and out of each others’ offices.  The internet crashed.  News sites were jammed.

And so it continued for the afternoon, with everyone trying to work out, find out what was going on.  But work beckoned, so dipping in and out was the best that could be managed.

I do remember an uneasy, fearful quiet settling eventually.  A sense that what ever it was, it was huge, an event of such enormity, it was difficult to grasp.

And most folk going home early.  I picked my bairn up from school, came home, switched the TV on and spent the evening holding my wee man close, flicking constantly between channels, tears rolling down my cheeks most of the time.  Still trying to sort through the snippets from the day and make sense of it all.

In the days afterwards, the mood was strange.  Subdued but with everyone being kind and rather gentle.  Everything slowed, and the facts leaked out.  Not just the World Trade Centre, but the Pentagon.  The astonishing bravery of firefighters especially, but also, all those others who ran in the wrong direction, to try to save.  The unbearable sadness of all those final messages home.  The tragedy of so many ordinary lives made utterly extraordinary by circumstance.  By being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Everyone had an opinion on what, how and why.  It was the only topic of conversation.  But in amongst all the conspiracy theories and the almost unbelievable truth, a universal realisation.  That everything had changed.  That things would never be the same again.  And so it has proved.

Malc’s recollection:

I’ll be demonstrating my youthfulness by comparison here, but on 11 September 2001, I was 17 and in my final year at Keith Grammar School.  It was a Tuesday afternoon and we had P.E – which various members of my class frequently missed.  Thus one of my friends was sitting upstairs in the cafe watching on TV as the attacks happened.  When the class was over, he came down to the hall to tell us what had happened.

P.E was the final class of the day for me, but we were due to head to Aberdeen to a schools public speaking competition at the end of the school day.  The bus left at 4, so when the bell went I ran to the school’s computer room and  got myself to the BBC website to see what was going on.  Even at that stage I knew I was watching a world-changing event, though we didn’t know the whole story.  At that point, the details were still hazy – the Twin Towers had been hit, but they were still standing, and there was no news about the other two planes at that point.

What remains with me are two clear memories after that.  The first of those was the school bus to Aberdeen.  Strangely enough, for a public speaking competition – even though there were only 3 of us involved – we took around 25 pupils with us as support.  I’d never been on a quieter school bus – especially when the news came on the radio.  There were younger kids on the trip too – 12/13 year olds who would usually be joking around – and even they were quiet, desperate to find out what had happened.

The second memory is from the following day at school.  Our sixth year was quite a small group – around 40 or so pupils – and so a few of us had a free period and were sitting around in the common room.  It was very quiet – a very strange, subdued atmosphere for a school common room.  Someone brought a US flag which we hung up in the room.  I remember a few of the folks were quite upset so we decided that – just as a group of 20 or so, when we were all together – we’d go to the hall and observe a couple of minutes silence.  A small gesture, meaningless in its simplicity and its practical implications.  But it was something that at that point in time, we could do.  And even though none of us – I don’t think – had any physical connection with any of the victims of the attacks, we had felt a connection with America that day, and that was a connection we felt, as a group, we had to commemorate.

As a politics undergraduate, and subsequently an International Relations postgrad, specialising in Terrorism, the events were a key influence on my area of study.  Making sense of it at the time – as a 17 year old – was impossible.  Making sense of it 10 years later, with an MSc in the subject isn’t any easier.

Enthusiasm goes a long way

Aug 25

Posted by Malc in International | 19 Comments

After an extended absence on my part (what do you mean, you didn’t miss me?!) due to endless PhD drafting and then holidaying, I reckoned it was time to get back on the horse.  Figuratively speaking – given my allergy to horse hair, were I to actually do so, I’d end up in hospital.  Anyway, I was itching to write something and about something… but it really does look like there’s nothing going on here.  I mean, apart from the floods and the riots, the borderline homophobic parliamentary motions and the ongoing debates over what happens when (if?) Scotland becomes independent with regards currency etc.  But you’ve covered all that.  So what do I write about?

Well, I guess those of you who don’t have an interest in politics outside Scotland might want to look away now.  I’ve spent the last couple of weeks in the land of the free and the home of the brave.  Where choice is king, everything comes with peanut butter (including pretzels, which were awesome) and an ambulance call out costs you three grand.

I do love the States though.  I love their enthusiasm for sports – college sides have 100,000-seater stadiums for their American Football teams (and graduation ceremonies).  That’s bigger than our pro-teams.  I love their enthusiasm for their colleges – their affinity with an education establishment where they attended lasts a lifetime (including dancing to the college fight songs at weddings!).  Most of all, I just love their enthusiasm.  Here we struggle to serve people with a smile – there you don’t just get told to have a nice day, its got to be a great day.  One guy saw I was off out running (in ridiculous heat) and told me to have a “great one”.  Enthusiasm.  That’s something we can learn.

You wonder where I’m going with this.  I kind of wonder too.

To politics, of course.  We’re in a down year for elections in the States, but the race for the Republican Presidential nominee to challenge President Obama is kicking off.  While I was on holiday they held a straw-poll for candidates in Iowa (first state to hold its caucus for candidates, scheduled for Feb 6th 2012) in which Minnesota Representative Michelle Bachmann narrowly beat out Texas Representative Ron Paul to win the non-binding poll.  There were NINE names on the ballot paper, plus a space for a ‘write-in’, in which Texas Governor Rick Perry gained the support of 3.6%, of voters – despite not actually entering the race until the day of the poll.

So, at the moment, its a crowded field for the Republicans.  There are no fewer than FIFTEEN formally declared candidates at this point, with no real front-runner.  Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (a candidate the last time around) held that position for around four months, when the race began – and is still a top-tier candidate.  But his lead is now just 2 points over the recently-announced Rick Perry.  Michelle Bachmann’s support among social and Christian conservatives looks to have dipped a little with Perry’s involvement in the race.

When I was in the States, I took this photograph of a t-shirt:

While its George W. Bush, and its mocking Obama’s “hope” slogan from the 2008 Presidential election, it does make a point:  A lot of what Obama promised to change hasn’t changed.  Yes, there have been global economic conditions which have made some of his promises difficult to achieve (healthcare, for example) but there are also things he could have done and simply has not (like closing out Guantanamo Bay).  He had a Democratic Congress for the first couple of years of his term, and it made very little difference to what he could and could not achieve in office.

The point is that this is a very winnable election for the Republicans – and that’s not something you would have expected to hear in the immediate aftermath of Obama’s election.  But if the Republicans are going to win back the White House, they have to pick a decent candidate.  From the current field, its difficult to see who that is.  And even among those who are speculated to run, but haven’t yet announced, there are not any really inspiring names.  Sarah Palin isn’t going to beat Obama – and you wouldn’t want her to even if you were a Republican.  Ditto John Bolton, the former US Ambassador to the UN.  I’ve seen a couple of interviews with him and he just comes across as an arrogant, for want of a better word, dickhead.  Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani would be a good bet, but given his more liberal views on some things, plus family issues, he’s unlikely to get the nomination.  There’s even a white power advocate and former Klan wizard (David Duke) planning a presidential run.  Which lets you know just how crazy the Republican race might get.

Anyway, I’ve got some friends in the States who might give us some on-the-ground chat about the Presidential race.  Not that this election will have any bearing whatsoever on events in Scotland at all.  But its an election, and we all love elections, right?

No wonder you guys didn’t miss me…

Will the National Transitional Council hand Megrahi over to the USA?

Aug 24

Posted by Guest Blog in Crime, Holyrood, International, Westminster | 18 Comments

A guest post from Stuart MacLennan. Stu is a PhD Candidate in the Faculty of Law at Trinity College, University of Dublin. He is a former adviser to the Scottish Parliament Labour Group on External Affairs, which is why he wrote us a piece about Megrahi. He was also a Parliamentary Candidate – but the less said about that, the better.

Scotland may well find itself facing another diplomatic row with the United States of America. New Jersey Senators Robert Menendez and Frank Lautenberg have called on the Libyan National Transitional Council to hand Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi over to the United States. Until yesterday it was easy to dismiss this call as just another stunt by vote-hungry US Senators, but with the National Transitional Council (NTC) on the cusp of full control of Tripoli it has become a question that warrants some consideration.

Of course, legally and politically the situation is far more complex than Lautenberg and Menendez would have us believe. Leaving aside the dubiousness of the original conviction there are questions as to jurisdiction, international law, United States law, as well as the diplomatic, political and practical considerations.

At first glance jurisdiction seems simple. The flight blew up shortly after crossing the corner of the Solway Firth into Scotland and fell out of the sky towards Lockerbie and Langholm. Ergo, the bombing of flight Pan Am 103 is subject to the criminal law of Scotland, right? Well, things are slightly different where aircraft are concerned. The United States has never been shy about extending its jurisdiction extra-territorially, and the Tokyo Convention on Offences and Certain other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft 1963 creates the so-called “Aircraft Jurisdiction”. The Convention provides that the Country in which an aircraft is registered has jurisdiction over criminal acts while the aircraft is in flight or on the surface of the high seas. The United States has therefore always claimed jurisdiction over the bombing of flight Pan Am 103.

However public international law also comes into play where the Lockerbie trial is concerned. The United States along with the United Kingdom jointly sponsored Security Council Resolution 1192, binding members to accept the jurisdiction of a Scottish Court constituted in Camp Zeist in the Netherlands as the trial venue for Megrahi and his co-accused Lamin Khalifah Fhimah. The United States cannot unilaterally ignore this resolution, though as a permanent member of the Security Council it could propose a resolution overturning it. Without a further resolution, as Professor Robert Black points out, the Federal Government would not only be in breach of International Law but also of Art. VI, Clause II of their own Constitution.

But wait! “What about double jeopardy?” I hear you ask…

The famous double jeopardy rule contained within the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution is not as airtight as it first appears. The dual sovereignty exception, which was developed by the Supreme Court in order to protect the rights of the federal government and the states to prosecute crimes independently of each other, appears to have been extended to foreign prosecutions [U.S. v. Richardson 580 F.2d 946 (9th Circuit 1978)]. Therefore provided the United States remains in compliance with its international obligations there is no bar on Megrahi standing trial again in the U.S.

So handing Megrahi over to the U.S. to stand trial is, theoretically speaking, possible in law however the politics make things even more difficult. The Obama administration is understandably keen to avoid being seen to be flouting Security Council Resolutions, so if they wanted Megrahi back they would have to have the acquiescence of fellow permanent member, the United Kingdom – but would they receive it?

In both Government and Opposition David Cameron has been clear about his objections to the release of the Lockerbie bomber. He has continued to maintain that he felt it was wrong that Megrahi was released though has never stated that he believes he should be returned to prison (despite what his spokesperson seemed to think today). The political row that returning Megrahi to the United States would create would be one that I believe David Cameron would wish to avoid.

Alex Salmond appears to relish in the controversy his Government has created. He has succeeded in putting successive UK Governments in a tricky spot over Megrahi, and in attracting the ire of Hillary Clinton has been elevated to the status of a world statesman. I do not believe David Cameron would put Whitehall on yet another collision course with Holyrood, particularly given the concessions the UK Government has already made to the Nationalists. Nor would Cameron wish to further enhance Alex Salmond’s quasi-Presidential status in the run-up to a referendum on Scottish Independence.

From a practical perspective – at present we do not know where Megrahi is. Megrahi was released on license and returned to a Government which for the most part doesn’t exist any more. East Renfrewshire Council, the local authority responsible for monitoring Megrahi’s release on license, admits it is in “uncharted territory” in monitoring his license and is urgently trying to make contact with him. Furthermore Tripoli could remain in turmoil for some time to come and Megrahi may well slip through the net.

Finally, given the uncertainty as to what kind of state may emerge in Libya, there’s no guarantee that the new regime will be any more acquiescent with the United States than its predecessor. Even if they manage to find Megrahi they may not hand him over. And given that it took the joint efforts of the United Kingdom, the United States, the United Nations Security Council and the passage of more that ten years to extradite him the first time around – Senators Lautenberg and Menendez may have to accept that Megrahi will never see the inside of a prison cell again. To paraphrase Kenny McAskill: the next judgment Megrahi faces will almost certainly be that of a higher power.

The new Greek junta unleashes terror

Jul 3

Posted by Guest Blog in Europe, Holyrood, International | 8 Comments

Another guest post from Marinos Antypas, who’s previously guested at James’s old site.

AthensBlinded by the economic catastrophe threatening the Eurozone lest Greece manages to sort its debt out, Europe has ignored a far more pervasive threat: nestling in its bosom is potentially the first dictatorial EU member state.

The definition of a dictatorship is not the abolition of parliamentary democracy or the electoral system per se (Hitler and Mussolini as well as the Stalinist Czechoslovakian regime were democratically elected). Rather, a dictatorship is a polity under which parliament effectively abolishes its decision-making power when the government turns against the population at large by means of brutal violence and intimidation.

Both these conditions are in place in Greece. In Spring 2010, the Greek parliament effectively abolished itself when it voted to deny itself the right to ratify any future changes in the IMF/EU bailout clauses. All power was given to the Finance Minister, who could thereafter ratify any new bailout-related law with a single signature. It’s important to note that the Finance Minister can be appointed by the Prime Minister from outwith his party’s elected MPs. This then places Greece into what Agamben has called a state of exception: the law abolishes itself as the only resort of maintaining its own order.

This magic trick of exceptionality worked for a whole year until last week, when the Prime Minister decided to put the second bailout to the vote. Doing so would seem a step back from his previous forward strategy. However, the way the vote was conducted points to the exact opposite. First, the vote was open, thus any government MP who voted against it did so publicly and was expelled from the Party (there was only one such brave man). Second, the only other MP who was intending to vote against the bill was allowed to break with all parliamentary regulations and give a speech alongside his final, Yes-vote.

The House Speaker, a government MP himself, continued to break Parliamentary regulations by failing to read a letter of No-vote from a government MP, who was also a traditional corner-stone of the Socialist apparatus. He opted not only to vote against the bill but quit the Party out of his own will. Finally, breaking with all Parliamentary procedures and common sense, the bill was voted en bloc, with no individual articles brought to the vote: it was either take it or leave it.
To add to this breach of democratic process, a few days before the actual vote, the deputy Prime Minister declared that if the bill was not passed, the government would have to bring in tanks to protect banks from the crowds. The choice was either the bill or the army – a real democratic dilemma comprising dictatorship on the streets.

While all this was unfolding in the Temple of Democracy, as Greek politicians like to call the ancient Palace housing their mockery of a Parliament, on the streets of Athens, real democracy was developing. Strikes, protest marches, direct-democratic assemblies with a remarkable lack of the violence that so often blots the democratic landscape in Greece. All of this was first ignored, then petted in the hope of some reconciliation. When that failed, the movement was accused of being apolitical, aphasiac, irresponsible and irrelevant. Even when a quarter of a million protesters gathered outside the Parliament shouting “Thieves”, the politicians could only scoff at the lack of organisation and ideological direction. The intention of the government was obvious: not to let the “multitude” spoil the voting of the new bailout bill.

After the “tanks” reference, the government began spreading rumours that a semi-armed assault against the Parliament was being planned, in an attempt to keep people off the streets. The first 48 hour general strike since the collapse of the colonels proved that these rumours were blatantly unfounded. Not only was there no attempt to storm the Parliament, but throughout the two days of protest the only damage done was on the strict periphery of Syntagma Square. As even the staunchest media defenders of the government had to admit, no more than five molotov cocktails were thrown, whilst the number of rowdy protesters did not exceed 200, a surprisingly low number for Athens where anarchist protest marches number up to 5.000.

The total cost of the damage (mainly to the marble décor of the posh hotels surrounding the square) came to 500,000 euros. At the same time, the reported cost of tear gas used by police forces amounted to 900,000 euros. The difference reflects the disproportionate relationship between protestor violence and police repression, especially as witnessed on Wednesday 29th of June.

The way the government deployed its police forces on that day can lead to only one conclusion: its aim was terror. Riot policemen attacked anything that moved on the streets of Athens. If there were 200 rowdy protestors there were 500 wounded. While the clashes did not exceed the periphery of Syntagma Square, tear gas, stun grenades and batons were used as far as the Acropolis, Plaka and Monastaki. Tourists and Special Olympics staff were brutally attacked. The police attacked the press, fired tear gas inside the underground Metro station where an impromptu Red Cross hospital was treating several hundreds of wounded, even beating the uniformed Metro staff as they tried to bring some calm. Photos show policemen throwing stones and marble pieces at protestors, ignoring people who tried to burn down shops, harbouring and protecting iron bar-wielding neo-nazis, using their batons upside down in order to hit people on the head with the metal end of the baton, gesturing with their middle finger and shouting obscenities at the protestors, kicking and beating fallen protestors, smashing restaurants and grocery shops in Athens’ high streets.

All this was filmed, and is now circulating widely in Greece; meanwhile, Europe looks elsewhere, relieved that the bailout bill has passed. Yet this unprecedented attack against the entire population of Athens, this systematic state terror has united Greek society like never before.

The Judges Association now talks of “state violence”; the Pharmacist and Medical Associations have pressed charges against the police; the Metro employers have called the riot police “the new SS”; Amnesty International has raised concerns; hotel owners talk about police excesses; academics have accused the government of premeditated violence; even members of the ruling party have expressed disdain at the way the police treated protestors.

In the midst of it all, the government pretends everything is fine, and that the police did its work. If its work was to show who is the boss, who can beat and gas the population with impunity, indeed it has. The 17 year old boy who had his tongue cut as a result of police beating him on the head is the ultimate proof of what this “work” means. It is the same “work” performed when the extreme right unleashed a three day pogrom against immigrants in the centre of Athens last spring, killing one and wounding scores with knives: the police stood idle arresting nobody. It is the same “work” performed when the police stop and search people in the street of Athens, tearing to pieces any book they might carry in their bags.

This “work” has a very old name: fascism. Indeed, the central banner on Syntagma square reads: “The junta did not end in 1973, we will bury it in this square”.