Category: Articles

Categories
Articles

Talk is Cheap

It’s Saturday morning in Luxembourg City and I’m readying for another session of keyboard bashing. The ritual includes the thick espresso lungo and a quick read through of the grapevine to see whether I’ve missed any last minute oddities coming from the island. Sure enough, even though it’s barely nine of the clock, some eager beavers (dare I add card carrying progressives?) are busy on Facebook quoting the latest news item that reads: “Air Malta CEO to get €500 package”. Suddenly the coffee tastes sour.

You could see it coming. I scarcely needed to refer to the actual news item to confirm my most basic of hunches but I did anyway out of some masochistic impulse and there it was − buried among the lines of the report: “Sources said Mr. Davies was the cheapest of three short-listed contenders for the post. The most expensive asked for a package exceeding €1.1 million.” The report went on to explain that the choice for Davies only came when the government failed to obtain the services of their first choice − a former consultant with Easy Jet. Instead we get the bargain: Mr Davies. Or at least the poor (it’s an expression) man will now forever be seen as such.

A grand don’t come for free

This is the result of government pre-empting the Opposition by attempting to adjust to the Opposition’s (very misguided) standards of expectation. J’accuse has analysed this fixation about salaries before − remember the “Who Gets Paid More than the President” saga? It’s bad enough that we have an Opposition that will hammer on about paying foreigners and paying them too much − half a million euros per year? Now we also have the government (or a source) leaking the fact that our money is being spent on bargains in a move that is very evidently there to appease the Opposition’s ridiculous stand.

It’s what you get for dealing with stupid − or as Forrest famously said: “Stupid is what stupid does”. We’ll hear all about the “downsizing” of Air Malta and how Mintoff had created a winner that is now being dismantled piece by piece by the spendthrift Nationalists to the detriment of the worker. We’ll hear how the “penny wise pound foolish” approach translates to being harsh with the haddiema and generous with the elite. Labour has always been great at grinding out this kind of animosity − being the progressive, modernist, European party that it is.

We now have to deal with the added ignominy of a government that is beginning to show signs of thinking in Labour’s terms. Hey, we know we need to reform the airline, we know we need compete in a dog eat dog world but hey, we got a bargain! Well, while I’d like to wish Mr Davies the best of luck with his new endeavour, I’d hate to be in his shoes what with the kind of confidence his new employers seem to have in him. Thank you very much Labour. Thank you very much PN.

Free is free

What we have called dumbing down for a very long time is also due to the culture of the “cheap”. It’s all pervasive and it is not just limited to monetary terms. In education we have witnessed the gradual dilution of university and other degrees − what Mintoff couldn’t do, public perception and a watering down of standards is achieving very quickly.

In politics we are already scraping the bottom of the barrel. We have no party that is willing to stand by a set of values or principles. There is only one constant: the vote. The ugly counterpart to that constant is the cheap appeasement of the man in the street who hangs on to the edge of one network or another in the hope that the crumbs that fall off the table might satiate his needs for the week.

And to get the crumbs we play our part: ‘Labourites’ will take the cue and grumble and obsess on salaries for the “blue-eyed”, ‘Nationalists’ will reopen the history books and flutter around in the mess they helped create. All the while, the nation is all the worse off as it cheapens itself thanks to this political prostitution. Yes, expression and most other freedoms are free. That does not mean that they have to be cheap. Unfortunately, there is no longer any benchmark bar the electoral guillotine − and that too has proved to be easily malleable.

bert4j_110327

Pleistocene and plasticine

We have no exacting standards. We have no aspirations, either as a nation or as individuals, other than the rat race as scripted by the behemoths: the two dinosaurs of our political firmament. There is no sphere − commercial, educational, social or any other that you can think of − that has avoided the dumbing down. Land of opportunity? Hell no. In this land we are busy holding each other back.

Well, so long as it is cheap and affordable, who are we to complain?

www.akkuza.com − clicks are free

This article and accompanying Bertoon appeared in today’s edition of The Malta Independent on Sunday.

Categories
Articles

J’accuse: Conscientious objectors and objectionable consciences

Last Thursday’s UN Resolution 1973/11 did more than just belatedly clear the Libyan air of the one-sided aerial assaults by Gaddafi’s troops. The resolution also cleared the air of a lingering suspicion that the scheming Colonel had managed to get away with hypnotising the international community into an inert bubble of passive gobsmackedness. He had not. As green troops honed in on Benghazi and as we held our collective breath for the inevitable bloodbath in the eastern rebel stronghold, the UN Security Council finally voted to impose a no-fly zone over Libya (and a bit more).

Britain and France (for spearheading the vote) and the US (for belatedly seeing the light) became the new symbols of the fight for liberty and democracy. They were the West’s answer to the Libyan rebels’ plea for support. There were also five abstentions on the day. None of the permanent members exercised their veto but the five abstentions carried the weight of five nations’ conscientious objection to the means being suggested. The abstention roll call is a roll call of giants who refused to commit to decisive action to prevent an impending bloodbath: Russia, China, Brazil, India and Germany.

Lay down your arms

Thankfully for the international community, Malta did not have a vote on the Security Council resolution. I’d hate to see the likes of Cameron, Sarkozy and Obama wait for our nation’s representatives to fret about who to pass the decision-making buck to in such a situation − referendum? free vote? who knows? We cannot however hide from the geopolitical reality of the situation and, after having milked what we could of our “heroic” acts of bravery in the “evacuation”, we now find ourselves bang in the middle of the effective area for enforcing a UN mandated no-fly zone. What would OUR conscience say?

After a couple of hours (over 15 but who’s counting?), during which we had to “suffer the ignominy” of being tagged as a British military base on some lax international news channels (so much for 31 March − but thank God for the Malta Tourism Authority for setting them right), our conscience finally dragged itself to a podium and addressed the gathered assembly of journalists.

But back to the conscience. Our Prime Minister found some time to stay away from the hotline with Libya or from the god-awful diversion of “the divorce referendum question” and addressed the nation. This was in a way our moment of truth. Which side would Malta be on? Would the neutrality question raise its hypocritical head again, almost 30 years on from the infamous “compromise”? Would the heroic George Cross Island once again become a fortress and bastion for the forces of liberty and democracy?

Fear and Loathing

Well, watching Prime Minister Gonzi at work was an experience. I did not see an assertive Prime Minister on the podium. I did not see a leader of men who put his country on the same side as those who would do their utmost to help their brothers in distress. Gonzi looked more like an Archbishop. You could fill the gaps in his press conference by inserting the Maltese “jekk Alla jrid” (if God wills).

If God wills, the guns will be put down. If God wills, the Libyan leader who threatened bloodshed in the Mediterranean basin will suddenly develop a human side and will not proceed with the massacre. If God wills, there will be no need to enforce the no-fly zone because there would be no more fighting. If God wills, we will not need to send planes from our island. If God wills, we will remain the selective Florence Nightingale of the Mediterranean – the unsung heroes. If God wills, the Malta Tourism Authority will remain the only authority reminding the world that all we care about is tourism – and that, hey, we are not a British base, we are an independent republic that freed itself of the Brit oppressor (and Nato) in 1979. Jeez… haven’t you guys seen Gensna?

On the one hand, there’s British Prime Minister Cameron saying “to suggest that we should pass a resolution like this and then sit back and hope that somebody somewhere in the Arab world will act instead of us is profoundly wrong.” We get Archbishop Gonzi being the non-committal apologist worried of shaking the hornets’ nest of anachronistic neutrality clause or of standing on the side of liberty. We do not even get a condemnation of Gaddafi and a clear “Get out!” We get a half-baked prayer that hopefully the arms are laid down and that there will be no need to enforce the no-fly zone. Yes. And the ugly monster will go away on its own. Is this really a position based on conscience and principle? I’m not too sure about that but the impression we seem to be giving is of a country lacking the serious attributes to stand tall among nations. Ah, but we sure have a great big conscience.

bert4j_110320_02

Free vote and free conscience

Archbishop Gonzi’s video to his flock was not the only one to drop into my inbox this week. We also received Inhobbkom Joseph’s vid following the parliamentary marathon vote on the question to be asked for the referendum. It was a gut wrenching performance by the paladin of Maltese Progressives that begs the question: Does he know no shame? Joseph’s fans still swim happily in the belief that the divorce question is somehow interlinked with the survival of this government. Joseph does nothing to dispel this confusion for the sake of a clearer divorce debate. No. He actually tells us “this is not about the referendum or divorce”.

Yes siree, the horse has spoken. So there you are, you stupid, peddling peasant who has been celebrating a great victory for the progressive modern Malta being catapulted into Europe by Joseph and his Fawning Horde (+JPO and Mugliett). You thought it was about divorce? Hell no. It isn’t.

You have been GIVEN (thanks Joseph) the right to express your opinion on 28 May. It’s an expression that will count for Jack Shit come the vote in Parliament following the referendum. Because the same party that is claiming to be dragging us kicking and screaming into the Europe of modern progressive values DOES NOT HAVE A POSITION ON DIVORCE. It has a position on “frijvowts”. It gives its MPs the “frijvowt” on the referendum question. It gives the people a “frijvowt” to say what it thinks on divorce AND it will give another “frijvowt” to its MPs to vote on the eventual Bill in Parliament ACCORDING TO THEIR CONSCIENCE.

That means that this sniggering geezer who is so patronisingly smug about moving Malta closer to Europe (puhlease) would love to have y’all believe that the “frijvowt” is actually a yes to divorce. IT IS NOT. Because the probability is that even with a positive referendum result (and Joseph is not doing much to encourage that), the chances are that the 69 eejits voting “according to their conscience” shoot down the Bill. Godbless.

bert4j_110320_01

Balls and bollocks

Two videos. Two men addressing the nation. Two supposed leaders that represent our country. They only managed in their own way to make me squirm with anger and disgust. I know for a fact that they made many others want to leave − rip up their passports and conscientiously object to being a part of this country full of men abusing their objectionable consciences. Twice, in the space of a week, we have had to suffer the arguments of supposed leaders of men who are hiding behind convoluted reasons that they like to attribute to conscience. The end result is that we have leaders and potential leaders who have abdicated their decision-making responsibility − all in the name of a conscience that is increasingly hard to decipher (and justify).

It’s sad. Very sad. In both cases the lives of men are at stake. On the one hand our PN government is failing the rebels in Benghazi, Misratah and more on the flimsy excuse of a neutral conscience. On the other our supposed PL Progressive Leader has failed to grab the bull by the horns and forge together a party that asserts the right to divorce and remarry in the 21st century. Taking us into Europe is he?

I’ve got a new slogan for J’accuse for 2011. It’s proving to be more and more true as the year unfolds. It’s best said in Italian and I guess this week really proved its point: “In un paese pieno di coglioni, ci mancano le palle”.

This article and accompanying Bertoon(s) were published on today’s edition of The Malta Independent on Sunday.

Categories
Articles

J'accuse : Unbearable Lightness

There is a German expression “Einmal ist keinmal” which translates to “once does not count” or “once is nothing”. If something happens only once then it might as well not have happened at all. Milan Kundera’s “The Unbearable Lightness of Being” is an examination of human existence from the point of view of the idea that every person has only one life to live and since once does not count then, by this logic, that life (which only happens once) is insignificant. By this logic every person’s struggle to make his own life significant causes him an incredible amount of suffering: the unbearable lightness of being.

Einmal ist keinmal. Once does not count. We tend to think in cycles when trying to explain the great narrative of human history. Whether we are looking at the recurrence of revolutions or the recurrence of natural catastrophes, we compare and contrast. We like to call them the lessons of history: a history that has often taught us that repetition is in itself a constant. Does that repetition lessen our sense of insignificance? Does our experience gathered in the DNA of the human race count for anything in shifting the balance away from the unbearable lightness?

Nippon

The world woke up in shock on Friday having witnessed the calamitous events in Japan. Scenes that seemed scripted in Hollywood played live on our screens, as office blocks shook, fires blazed and tsunamis obliterated entire cities. The Land of the Rising Sun could not be more detached from our tangible realities. There is a surreal feel to anything that comes from the Nipponic archipelago to Europe and, speaking for myself, I find that I have to do a double-take to remember that the unbearable lightness of being in Sendai can be very much the same as in Marsaxlokk.

Thousands of people perished in one of the greatest earthquakes since 1908. Statistics about the greatest quake or the largest tsunami serve as a reminder that this was not the first quake nor will it be the last. The Japanese, a great, enterprising people who had lifted the phoenix from the ashes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki know that. That is why the effect of the quake on buildings was not as high as it could have been in any other country. The Japanese have learnt the lessons of history and were prepared for the big shake. It seems that the terror from the sea (as best symbolised by Godzilla in modern mythology) could not be so easily quelled. There’s yet another lesson to be learnt as the world rolls up its sleeves and prepares to assist the Japanese in this moment of truth.

Cyrenaica

The homeland of Simon the Cyrene experienced renewed attacks by Gaddafi’s army. The attacks have intensified ever since Gaddafi noticed the general shuffling of feet by the international community. His mediatic onslaught, parallel to the bombs and missiles, sowed enough seeds of doubt to prevent a decisive support action that might have boosted the rebel forces’ chances. Gaddafi does not have all the merit (if merit it is) for the doubt that crossed the minds of potential international interveners.

There is much about Iraq and Afghanistan in the hesitation to intervene in Libya. References to “past mistakes” tend to produce the proverbial cold feet. So as your average Benghazi is riding his Toyota pickup with his hands on a light machine gun, praying that the international community pick out Gaddafi’s airborne forces, meetings and counter-meetings from Washington to Brussels seem to produce many words but little effective action.

bert4j_110313

Ungainly giants

The business of “past mistakes” was also raised by a French minister who pointed out, to anyone who bothered to listen, that back in 1958 the non-communist world never turned up to back the Hungarian uprising in Budapest as the Soviet tanks rushed in to crush the rebellion. As we cross-referenced the near and not so near history, all sorts of skeletons stopped gathering dust in the cupboard. The conventional idea that the “Arab World” mistrusts the West began to be severely tested the moment it became evident that no matter how much mistrust there may be, it is Western forces that can deliver a decisive blow to Gaddafi’s superior firepower.

So the Unions met and discussed. The European Union, still coming to terms with any remote idea of concerted action under Baroness Ashton, replayed the tune of slow reactivity. Sarkozy’s government acknowledged the rebel government in Libya but the EU held back. As bombs and superior power fell on Zawiya, the EU once again gave disparate messages to the international community. It was only Friday night when a clear and united approach was finally clear. Next step − get the approval of the Arab League and the African Union to actually get something done that goes beyond “Gaddafi must go”.

Malta Tourism Authority

Internationally, the mess still means that your average Simon the Cyrene in Benghazi still has nothing short of words in support of his fight against the crazy dictator. Locally (or nationally as some like to point out), the only institution that had a clear position on the Libyan crisis was the Malta Tourism Authority. It moved swiftly to curb the damage being wrought by the general idea shared by potential holidaymakers that Malta was no longer a safe place for a sun and sea holiday. This reaction was provoked by some early cancellations of holidays being justified by the fact that Malta’s role as Mediterranean Matron might make it a risky place to stay. MTA issued denials and Inhobbkom Joseph’s tourism campaign was belatedly vindicated (sic).

Otherwise, between John Dalli’s enormous faux pas, Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici’s spine-chilling appearance on Al Jazeera and Lawrence Gonzi’s insistence that Malta’s position on Libya is that “Gaddafi’s departure is inevitable”, we seem to be in quite a fix. The impression that Malta’s prime worry in the EU deliberation of more sanctions was the safeguarding of its business interests was not exactly a shining example of determined leadership. Well, so long as Hague can come over and pat Dr Gonzi patronisingly on his back, it’s all fine and dandy.

Politics Light

Were the Mayans right? Will the world end in 2012? The usual panic crowd is back. Expect the Nostradamus citations any moment soon. Over at J’accuse we’re still waiting for the infamous man with the blue turban to turn up − who knows it might be a Nato blue helmet. We’re also crossing our fingers for a week full of more decisive action in support of the Libyan rebels. That should make their being a little less unbearable.

www.akkuza.com celebrated six years of quality blogging this week. Check out the new logo and favicon on our website.


Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Articles

J'accuse : They love me all

“To men fighting for their lives day by day in the foulest of physical conditions it was nauseating to read, day after day, the lying official communiqués in the Press.” I came across this quote in a book by BBC journalist John Simpson (Unreliable Sources, Macmillan 2010) that is turning out to be an excellent and informative run-through of “how the 20th century was reported”. The quote itself is from an unnamed book by A.J. Cummings, editor of the News Chronicle early last century.

John Simpson’s work provides an authoritative insight into how the relationship between the press and the world altered − starting from the Boer War at the close of the 19th century and ending with the Iraq war at the turn of this century. It shows how the press managed to morph into various forms: from a useful tool of government propaganda at the height of jingoistic enthusiasm, to the inventive “journalism” based on ‘stands to reason’ assumptions. The quest to ‘report’ (and be the first to do so) eventually got entangled with political motivation and eventually political slant.

Conflicts

As I type, BBC World News is showing an e-mail from a viewer questioning the wisdom of a news item (by John Simpson incidentally) from Libya that might have been useful in reporting the strife in a particular corner of the world but might also, the viewer argued, have put the lives of those reported in further peril. Journalists working in war conditions are often faced with dilemmas − they need to substantiate the claims of aggression, murder and violence but to do so they need hard evidence. The battle lines are also drawn in the field of information.

Colonel Gaddafi and his son Saif have proved to be adept at manipulating the one great weakness of public information: doubt. The Gaddafis may be psychotic, they may be a rambling caste of lunatics but they are demonstrating a knack for playing with the weak-kneed and abusing the loopholes opened up by questionable precedents in the past. Early in the struggle, Muammar displayed this knack by bringing into play the Tiananmen and Moscow exception. It was not just down to

braggadocio: Moscow and Beijing sit on the Security Council. Gaddafi was speaking directly to the capitals, reminding them of the precedent they had set.

This week, as the battle between rebels and faithful forces (it is not such a coincidence that this kind of plight sounds like a more mundane plot to Star Wars) seemed to be moving towards a desert-induced stalemate, Gaddafi and Saif went into a PR overdrive. Don’t laugh. I’m not referring to pills in Nescafe bull. I’m referring to the enormous effort to sell the idea that this was a legitimate sovereign government under threat from foreign forces. Precedent, precedent, precedent. The international community hesitated to echo the word in the street: “Gaddafi Out!” We ended up with sanctions and more evacuations.

Perception

In 1935, following the Italian invasion of Abyssinia, the League of Nations had also displayed an uncanny ability to hesitate − its inability to take effective action has been linked to the inability of the members to give the necessary importance to Abyssinia and their fear of driving Mussolini into Hitler’s hands. The script in Libya is not identical to the Abyssinian question, but the move by Gaddafi to appoint new envoys at the UN and to continue to plug the line that his is a government under siege that is being falsely depicted in the news is intended to destabilise concerted international action.

Gaddafi’s targets are the weak-willed members of the international community. They are those who hate to be reminded of cosying up to the dictator, or worse, those who hate to look at him and see a bad copy of themselves. They are those who fell for his trap of “precedent”. Russian TV has promoted newsclips denying any air raids on civilians. The corroboration of Gaddafi’s assertions seemed misplaced in the light of other news items from the rest of the world. While conspiracy theorists might revel in this 2011 equivalent of the moon landing denials, you do get to wonder how much of this corroboration was scripted with Chechnya on the Russians’ mind (or the early rumblings of the Jasmine revolution’s spread to China).

bert4j_110306

Neighbours

Closer to home we had our own set of weak-willed who seemed to be prima facie advocates of caution. Their enthusiasm to play into the hands of Gaddafi and his spin soon unmasked them though. From (EU Commissioner) John Dalli to (former politician) Reno Calleja, they inexplicably pandered to the “wait and see” approach − sometimes even venturing on the “denial of violence by Gaddafi” line. Dalli stopped just short of accusing the international press of a montage that was intended to denigrate the Green Book Writer. It will be hard for Dalli to wriggle out of this mess. What counted for Joseph Muscat, with regard to image damage when it comes to management in times of crises, will also count for Dalli if what seems to be his inevitable leadership challenge ever comes true.

Malta’s press and people have enjoyed the limelight of this Libyan Crisis in a weird way. I had a bit of a problem with this sudden heroic status of our government and state because of its aiding and the “evacuation” of people caught in the midst of the Libyan Civil Uprising. Mind you, I had no problem with what was termed ‘heroics’, the government was after all doing the decent thing.

We cheered boatloads of Koreans, Chinese and Croatian workers entering the harbour. They were fleeing a war zone but it was OK − not just OK but heroic − for us to assist them in their plight. Only a few weeks back we would have had only one type of response to boatloads of refugees/immigrants fleeing their troubles. I guess our reply then would scarcely have qualified us to lick the boots of heroes.

Love
Communication has become vital in today’s world. A simple twist of words and a dedicated barrage of counter-information can make a dictator sound like the victim of a foreign conspiracy. There will always be those who are either too stupid, too duped or too involved to ask the right questions. Today’s press holds an important weapon in the battle for truth and justice. When wielded by the wrongpeople it can cause anything from irreparable damage to mental stagnation.

I wonder, though, what it will take to convince someone like John Dalli that the half a Libyan body (torso up) lying in the streets of Benghazi does not love Gaddafi. What media orchestration could have hospitals unable to take new patients, blood running on the streets and hundreds of thousands of people fleeing the country? Are all these people so stupid to have swallowed the media montages to the hilt? Really John: can you believe Muammar Gaddafi when he smiles at the BBC correspondent and says: “The people… they love me all”?

Jacques René Zammit blogs daily at www.akkuza.com… celebrating six years of pioneering quality blogging in Malta
on 10 March.

This article and accompanying Bertoon appeared yesterday in the Malta Independent on Sunday.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Articles

J'accuse : Revolting

“What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalisation of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.” The Jasmine Revolution seems to continue to vindicate Fukuyama’s famous words in his 1989 essay “The End of History”.

In the long timeline of human history 20 years is just a blip. In 1812 Napoleon faced the full and final settlement of the Napoleonic Wars that had their genesis in the 14 July popular uprising in 1789. Approximately the same amount of time passed between the fall of the Berlin Wall and the first rumblings of the Jasmine Revolutions. All clues point to a longer stretch of time for the viral revolutions to spread to other countries − as they have already done − such as Bahrain and Iraq: Fukuyama’s end of the Cold War is not so much an immediate happening but a gradual shutting of the door over a period of time.

Fukuyama’s theory centred around the fact that the only ideological alternatives that would be left after the end of the Cold War would be human rights, liberal democracy and capitalist free market economy. From Manama to Tunis, from Cairo to Tripoli, the loud voice of the peoples of what another theorist would call the Greater Middle East is being heard in order to determine their access to human rights, liberal democracy and a free market economy. On Friday, even the recently liberated Iraqis hit the streets denouncing a corrupt government and calling for reforms.

What civilisation?

The theorist who defined the civilisation of the Greater Middle East is Samuel Huntington. Like Fukuyama, Huntington also came up with an interesting analysis and theory of international relations. Unlike Fukuyama, Huntington saw a future of conflict along the fault-lines of civilisations. If he were alive, Huntington might want to rethink his theory or at least realise that his was a supposition that underestimated the power of the yearning for liberal democracy among Muslim peoples. Huntington’s Islamic civilisation has proved to have much more than “bloody borders” − it has uncovered a yearning for the liberal freedoms among a hitherto misunderstood mass of peoples.

Huntington may be forgiven for having theorised on what is fast turning out to be a stereotype but he was not alone. Even in the nineties, when the domino effect of the cold war liberation was at its highest, few would have theorised that the liberal streak would spread to the Middle East. Sure we speculated (and to a certain extent worried) about the Chinese peoples following suit but Tiananmen put an end to that quite quickly. And Gaddafi knew that didn’t he? The crackpot dictator could have lost his sanity long ago but his references to the June 1989 events in China were not haphazard.

We were all duped. All of us. In our uncomfortable entente with the pluri-decorated dictator from a North African tribe, we swallowed the lies that were fed to us. The lies that told us that tinpot dictators are the right sort of valve to hold down the hordes of uncivilised and radical peoples that threatened to be unleashed on us should the dictators ever let go. The lie was lubricated with oil and sweetened with smiles and promises. Politicians kowtowed, businessmen sucked up and we were happy to not be concerned.

 

 

The Inhuman Rights

Gaddafi was the West’s not so hidden secret. Lord Blair famously shook hands with the genocidal maniac in 2003 and Italy famously signed a Friendship Treaty with Gaddafi’s Jamahiriya. No sooner had the smiles and handshakes confirmed the Crazy Colonel’s rehabilitation in the international jet set did the businessmen land for a piece of the Libyan cake. Maltese businessmen included.

Look back at our dealings with Libya and not once will you see a reference to the people − to the subjects of the dictator. I hesitate to reproduce the image of what we thought of Gaddafi’s subjects but you do not need to go far for a reminder. Just open the comments at the foot of the first articles reporting the Libyan uprising. As Libya revolted Malta showed its revolting side. Speaking on Ghandi Xi Nghid, journalist Karl Schembri compared the vegetable vendor in Tunisia to the Czechoslovak Jan Palach. Few Maltese were making these comparisons at the start.

We were worried about the Libyan invasion (our wives, our children, our jobs in that oh so revolting singsong straight from the collective imagination inspired by Dragut’s corsairs), the GWU called on the Libyan people to calm down (lest Maltese workers lose their jobs), the politicians dragged their feet and the biggest noise the EU could make regarded the fears of an immigrant exodus.

Opportunity and hypocrisy

At the Saturday march organised in solidarity with Libya last week, the political group Graffitti caused a ruckus by carrying placards shaming Gonzi and Muscat for sucking up to Gaddafi. The pride of Maltese journalism threatened to quit the march and asked for the posters to be removed. Of course it’s one thing blogging about Mintoff’s parading with il-Kurunell and another looking such a poster in the face. The posters were not saying the whole truth though: Gonzi and Muscat were just part of a whole western lie that underestimated and disrespected the determination of a whole block of humanity in the Greater Middle East.

True, the insurgents have learnt the hard way that there will be no fighter jets coming to their rescue (who knows what accusations Obama’s government would have faced if it intervened… remember Libya has oil). They have learnt that the “self” in self-determination is a harsh reality that includes the risk of dismembered torsos and blood on the streets where you live. The are learning fast and by doing so they are earning the respect and admiration of a lazy West that had wrongly assumed that the wind of change that blew in Gorky Park would be limited to some of Huntington’s civilisations and not others. They may not know who Jan Palach is but they have shown the world that they can think just like him.

The tears of joy that burnt my face when I saw the jubilant scenes in Benghazi were mingled with a sense of anger at how long we have allowed ourselves to live the lie. True the revolution is fuelled by the new means of mass information (see the J’accuse post urging a philo-revolutionary revival of the defunct Voice of the Mediterranean) but it has also become one huge learning curve for the civilisations on all sides of the fault lines.

Viva la Vida indeed

Beyond the barricades there is a hidden link of humanity linking the Serb to the Burmese to the Egyptian to the Berber to the Maltese. Beyond the parochial perspective of journalists vying to become a one man CNN, of egocentric business communities and short-term politicians, there is a new movement and ideal that has rekindled the flame that started burning with the fall of the Berlin Wall. From Havana to Caracas to Moscow to Beijing all the way to earthquake riddled Christchurch, the world is still watching.

And if like Nero, Gaddafi is guilty of Queening while Tripoli burns, we would do well to learn at least one lesson from this latest instalment of the liberal democrat dream… that human rights are universal − really universal. They do not see the barriers of race, colour or creed − and that the DNA to fight for the rights of liberty, freedom and democracy is to be found in every last human being. Yes, even in those brothers of ours across the sea who we have looked down upon or ignored for so long.

Allahu akbar!

This article and corresponding Bertoon was published in The Malta Independent on Sunday (27.02.2011)

www.akkuza.com is fully compatible with the 2011 Jasmine Revolution.

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Articles

J'accuse : Fight for Your Right (to Party)

So the Rais is definitely out and has rushed off to a caravanserai off Sharm el-Sheikh. Thirty years have passed since Sadat’s assassination (and Mubarak’s rise to power), 59 since Nasser’s 1952 revolution and 92 since the first Egyptian revolution (of the modern era) of 1919. Symbolically, each revolution had centred around Tahrir Square (Liberation Square). Back in 1919, the first of two revolutions was triggered by the decision of the British to exile Wafd leaders. The Wafd party had managed to gather a movement of support in favour of independence and in March 1919 Saad Zaghlul and two other leaders were arrested by the British and exiled to Malta.

From Tahrir Square to Misrah San Gorg

Thus the paths of two nations-to-be crossed that year. In June 1919, three months after the deportation, the Maltese would have their own riots and also suffer loss of lives while in Egypt the uprisings would result in 800 dead. Zaghlul would return (via France) to be Prime Minister of Egypt for nine months in 1924 and was considered as the za’im al-umma − the national hero − by the people. Independent Egypt would coexist with what it considered to be British interference until the 1952 revolution and Nasser’s military takeover.

Fast forward to 11 February 2011 and the crowds are jubilant in Tahrir Square, glad to have freed themselves of a corrupt government. One hesitates to add “once again” since if you were to read the original messages of liberation back in 1952 you’d be forgiven to believe that the beast of corruption had been soundly beaten by the liberation forces back then. If ever there was proof needed that you can never be 100 per cent sure that this is the last change that was needed then that is Tahrir Square − the square of three revolutionary moments for a people aspiring for change. “Welcome to the New Egypt” said one poster on the streets last night. How long till the next gathering?

You wake up late for school

While historic events were rapidly unfolding along the Nile, the political parties in Malta were still unfolding the latest scene in the Divorce Legislation Drama. The PN executive gave us much to think about by proposing the agenda for the next few months. It reads (a) parliamentary discussion, (b) parliamentary vote, (c) referendum if (b) is in favour of divorce legislation. Strategists, amateur and professional alike, were out analysing what this meant and where it would take us. (Caveat lector: I type before the final PN vote on Saturday)

Politics being what it is, there is a fair amount of truth in the fact that the strategy for introducing legislation is as important as the discussion itself. It is ironic, in a way, that two different strategies could result in two different outcomes – both of which could be reasonably and legally justified as being representative of the people’s will. So in a way expect much punditry regarding the pros and cons of a “referendum before” or “referendum after” approach. Each scenario has its own winners and losers with one big loser being the divorce debate itself. The reason I say that is that the divorce debate is about politicians shouldering their responsibility and recognising that there is a moment when society (or parts thereof) is being deprived of a right − the right to remarry − and that something must be done about it.

The Nationalist Party has met this imperative half way. Its motion does entail the taking of a position on the matter: a clear no to divorce. What it also does though is succumb to the need to compensate the logic of values with the spinelessness of strategy. Hence we have the somersault logic of “desperately seeking the people’s mandate/consensus” on the one hand and “relegating popular vote to a post-parliamentary postilla” on the other. While recognising that there is an important value (to the party) at stake, the Christian-democrat party fails to put its money where its mouth is and resorts to the usual shenanigans.

You miss two classes and no homework

Meanwhile, back at Transparency Headquarters, as the work on the Victory Balcony presumably proceeds with haste, Inhobbkom’s soldiers couldn’t resemble a band of headless chickens any more if they covered themselves in tar and feathers and pulled their tops over their heads. You’ve got to pity the New Old Labour. They wait on tenterhooks for the latest fart downhill to inform them whether the “referendum after” strategy will hold true. Then you get those alarmed by the fact that Parliament will actually pronounce its position first: and they rebel − for they’d rather see which way the wind is blowing innit?

Will Karmenu Vella explain why the progressive Mintoffian government of the 70s missed out on introducing divorce legislation at the time? After all the song and dance about the 70s we witnessed during the Labour conference you’d really think he had an answer. Seriously, what is the undecided voter expected to do when he sees that charade? Take Labour with a pinch of salt? Honestly, what were they serving at the conference? From Anglu Farrugia’s tear-jerking story about the Sun King (rixtellu at Versailles?) to his dramatic Copperfield stunt complete with an imaginary Empire Station, for a moment I thought that the whole conference was one big candid camera moment scripted by Ricky Gervais.

bert4j_100213-1

Your mom threw away your best porno mag

And just to make sure that our country goes completely nuts about what rights are and how to use them, we get the very helpful pink press at work. In case you have not noticed there is an Internet battle going on. It pitches the Forces of Good vs. the Forces of Evil. Of course who is good and who is evil depends on who you read but there’s plenty going around. So while the nutters in red call for the head of the Wicked Witch (their words not mine), the nutters in blue have suddenly decided to dedicate some time to investigative journalism and patch together a story about unsolved crimes left over from the lovely Labour era.

The nutters in red, headed by an irate Saviour Balzan, are now calling for the government to shut down a private blog because of its content. They do not sue for libel; they do not make use of normal legal means in a democracy related to presumed abuse of freedom of expression. No. They expect the government of a democratic country to shut down a private blog − presumably by use of force or expropriation of private property. I am not surprised that they do not see the irony in all this. Given that among the supporters for this move are most of Labour’s press, you cannot help but link the move to Karmenu Vella & Co’s nostalgia for the “jalla immorru lura ghas-sebghinijiet” era. Freedom of expression − the red way.

For their part the nutters in blue react with visible enthusiasm. The Nationalist fold were handed reams of propaganda material on a plate what with all the nostalgic statements at the Labour conference. Where’s Everybody wasted no time in pasting a collage of the best selections that played like a set of bloopers from the Oscars. Meanwhile on Internet, the battle between Malta’s most read pink blog and its ugly spin off continued. This week we witnessed an experiment in “investigative journalism” that might have been, in any other time (preferably around 1988), a welcome stimulus to whoever is responsible for bringing criminals to justice. Instead it quickly transpired that the only interest behind the whole write-up was an attack by association on Illum journalist Julia Farrugia. The words “Why now?” echoed once again − almost a year to the day after the infamous Plategate outbursts.

Your Mum busted in and said “What’s that noise”?

In the end, all you can do is reflect that it is useless fighting for freedoms if you have no idea how to use them. Behind Nasser’s revolution in 1952 lay the hope for a new Egypt. In 2011 Egypt is having another stab at it, thanks to a people who have had enough of the old regime. Our national narrative teaches us that we have been fighting for freedom since 1919. Along the way we have gathered two tribes who laid claim to the next step along the road to freedom. The two tribes are in the middle of an identity crisis right now − both have long exhausted the bank of new ideas and are now resorting to cashing old cheques.

Right now we are all tweeting and messaging our solidarity with the people of Egypt and their happiness at smelling the air of newfound freedom. Unless we notice that for a revolution to start you don’t just need the square but you also need a freethinking people, we might just be deserving of our current state of inertia.

www.akkuza.com brought to you with headings courtesy of the Beastie Boys. We recommend Coldplay’s Viva la Vida as an after-article digestive (stream available on the blog).