When they hear the name Mohammed Ben Salmane (MBS), most people don’t react, as they can’t associate him with anything. If they are told that it was he who had a journalist cut up into small pieces and stuffed into garbage bags in the Saudi Arabian embassy in Turkey, it resonates more.
The graphic novel “MBS— L’enfant terrible d’Arabie Saoudite” introduces us to the life of this implacable ruler who tries to forge links with the great powers. By negotiating his support with the United States, Russia, China, India, or France, he seeks to position his country as a major player on the world stage.
The book is also a very interesting first approach to the history of Saudi Arabia, especially with regards to the Saud family and its reign. We realize the importance of alliances and radical decisions by MBS if he wishes to attain supreme power and hold to it.
Back cover of the graphic novel: MBS L’enfant terrible d’Arabie Saoudite
Domestic and regional stability remains a top priority for MBS. Even if he wants to modernize society and appeal to young individuals, he must at the same time avoid upsetting the Wahhabi clerics too much. The latter enjoy ancestral prestige and have a marked influence on the way people behave and think.
When it comes to imposing his ideas, MBS hasn’t invented a thing. Like most rulers of the world’s major countries, he has learned to use the media and spares no expense to achieve the desired results.
Top managers of intelligence and news organizations know very well the limits within which they can operate. You won’t see any photos of MBS spouses, or articles that would enlighten the public about the nightlife of the leader and his friends.
This graphic novel maintains interest by interspersing surprising anecdotes with pertinent information accessible to all. As the back cover of the book states, “This ambitious prince happens to be our ally in the Middle East : oil, the fight against terrorism, Arab-Israeli peace, arms sales … we need him. But what price will we pay?”
The graphic novel “Accidental Czar: The life and lies of Vladimir Putin”.
Note: The excerpts are taken from the French version of “Tsar par accident” and re-translated into English using DeepL.
Author Andrew S. Weiss has worked at the White House, the Pentagon, the State Department, and so on. He points out: “If someone had told me at the time that a former KGB non-commissioned officer – who had never really shone – a certain Vladimir Putin […] – would be promoted from the back rooms of the Kremlin directly to the head of the country, I would have told you to get yourself treated”. He adds: “What we think we know about him is often a clever mix of counter psychology and misinterpretations of Russia‘s thousand-year-old history “. His staging as a tough guy “allows him to come across as more intelligent – and more competent – than he really is. […] “.
The graphic novel “Accident Czar” tells the story of how Vladimir Putinfound himself in power at a time when his rather lacklustre career was destined for a lesser position. But the same could be said of some of the world’s dictators, presidents, kings and ministers over the ages who have been blessed with good fortune. They too have taken advantage of favorable opportunities to climb the ladder too high for their natural talent. The nation then pays the price until the person’s overthrow, exile or death.
Still, we have to give Putin credit for persisting, for hanging on, despite setbacks and rejections. To join the KGB, he was told to study or join the army. He did so and received his diploma.
In 1975, he joined the KGB. But it wasn’t the big missions he had dreamed of that awaited him, but local fieldwork. He failed to impress his superiors with the results he achieved. Following a brawl in the subway, he was transferred to Dresden in 1985, where his missions were meaningless due to lack of budget. In 1999, President Clinton was told that Putin would be the next Russian president. What had happened between 1985 and 1999 for Putin to suddenly emerge from obscurity and become President of Russia?
Credit must be given to his work ethic, but above all to his loyalty to his bosses in an organization that favors personal ties. Yeltsin, the president at the time, sensed his end was coming and offered Putin a deal. The author writes: “He would make him president if he agreed to protect him and his family“.
Just as Hindenburg believed he could manipulate Hitler by giving him access to the highest echelons of government, so Yeltsin thought he could do the same with Putin. In both cases, it was a costly mistake for Europe and the world.
The book reviews the rise of the Russian oligarchs, and the rapprochement of power for Putin’s friends. Andrew Weiss points out: “One of the points that foreigners don’t always grasp is that Russia is a society that operates on the basis of personal ties, rather than within the framework of institutions or the rule of law.“
In the years following the fall of the Berlin Wall, important sectors of the Russian economy were taken over by corrupt officials and KGB agents, as well as by the mafia. As the author writes: “Vladimir Kumarin, all-powerful boss of the notorious Tambov gang, ruled the country“.
Vladimir Putin’s support for the United States after the attacks of September 11, 2001 brought him closer to George W. Bush and his father George H. W. Bush, with whom he even went fishing in Kennebunkport. He hoped to revive the moribund Russian economy and gain the freedom to control the Russian media.
What’s most astonishing to me is that, during this period, Putin approved the highly controversial establishment of American and NATO bases across the former Soviet Union (Uzbekistan,Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan). With this gesture, he was seeking stabilization with the West. With the causes of the September 11th 2001 attacks still being debated around the world today, especially in the most informed circles, Putin was later forced to reflect on the relevance and consequences of his decision to authorize new American and NATO bases near Russia.
The Russian president quickly realizes that he doesn’t carry much weight in the diplomatic balance against a superpower like the United States. He is not recognized as a player to be reckoned with. With a view to better understanding between the West and Russia, the author stresses the importance of better understanding the grievances of both sides. He points out that this is sorely lacking.
Especially since the Kremlin is convinced that “demands for political change are always the result of Western-backed conspiracies“. All the major nations, by dint of monitoring each other and trying to influence the internal management of other countries, are projecting their intentions and no longer believe that a protest can come from the bottom up, based on a serious desire to improve certain detestable policies.
The author takes a look back at the problems surrounding Russia’s territorial security through the ages, invaded in turn by the Mongols, Napoleon and Hitler: “[Russia] traditionally relies on annexed territories to act as a buffer between the motherland and any external threat“. He also discusses the Chechen conflict, the fight against terrorism, political interference in neighboring states and Russian involvement in the 2016 US elections.
Andrew S. Weiss covers a lot of ground, and other themes find their way into the book: the history of the Cold War, Trump, Snowden, Wikileaks, the Sochi Olympics and the work of Maria Butina, a Russian agent who managed to penetrate the upper circles of the American Republican Party.
It was his belief in the irreversible decline of the West that enabled Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine.
The author concludes with a remark on the invasion of that country and the indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets: “The world is beginning to understand that Putin was never the strategist he claimed to be. He is an improviser caught in his own trap”.
Allow me to make a comment about the invasion of Ukraine. This country is to receive fighter planes from the Allied States to protect its territory, which deeply offends Russia. However, I would like to remind you that during the Second World War, the Soviet Union accepted a great deal of outside help for its defense on the Eastern Front. To name just one aircraft and country, the Soviet Union obtained 877 B-25 Mitchell bombers from the USA.
Proceeding step by step, Donald Trump is setting the table for a political system transition in the United States.
As he often impulsively says what he really thinks ( his numerous tweets are proof ), his recent visit to China convinced him that it is possible to change the american political system.
He said that it would not be a bad idea to think of a way that would allow more than two successive political terms, something that is actually forbidden by the Constitution of the United States. In order to do that, he proceeds in a similar pattern as Mussolini did and changes the American system step by step.
Not only does he attack the institutions representing the legal system, like the FBI, but he also attacks the media that do not think like he does. We could eventually see the creation of a Trump owned media that would become the official communication channel of the President.
Trump creates fictive foes by selecting several countries whose citizens are denied an entry in United States. All statistics show that crimes and attacks are in the vast majority committed by people that are already American citizens.
Donald Trump wants to become, for his supporters, the only object of their confidence and trust. He wants to be seen as the only shield that can protect them from the imaginary foes that have been created. He invents the idea of a wall that would supposedly be paid by Mexico, a ridiculous proposition that shoud have made everyone laugh from the very beginning but which nonetheless convinced the American voters. That says it all!
The vast majority of his supporters do not have the interest, or the ability, to analyze his empty rethoric and lies, his transformation of reality. Ignorance is what creates the fear of others. He counts on the cowardice of several elected Republicans who stopped asking questions about the actions of the President in order to concentrate only on a necessary reelection.
Those who consider Donald Trump lightly risk a lot. How many had even realized that, in order to prepare his political campaign, Cambridge Analytica was already at work?
Click on the link for other articles on geopolitics on my blog.
Trump’s political slogan “Make America great again” does not make any sense when analyzed against the nominee’s words and actions.
You cannot make America great again if your political platform does not present a clear plan of action for the American population. Formulas like “Look at this crowd!”, “We’re going to build a wall” and “I would have liked to punch him in the face” are not promises for a brighter future.
You cannot make America great again if your economic ideas involve isolating America from its long lasting commercial partners. America created 255,000 jobs in the sole month of July (2016). For a country that, according to Trump, loses everything to its commercial partners, it sounds somewhat contradictory. A populist platform will not help the American population grow up and understand how business thrives.
You cannot make America great again by building up tensions between ethnic groups within the United States.
You cannot make America great again by constantly lying. Numerous declarations by Trump have been found untrue.
You cannot make America great again if the few general proposals you put forward contradict each other. Trump promises to lower the American deficit ($23 trillion dollars) and, at the same time, repeats that he will spend billions and billions of dollars to refurbish and bring the military capacity back to what it used to be. This is totally contradictory. It implies that the American population will pay for the new expenses while having to deal with serious cuts in the nation’s budget. Since the rich American does not want to contribute more than he actually does, and that the poor American is already almost unable to survive, it implies that a disappearing middle class will foot the bill. This will not make America great again but instead create the worst internal crisis ever in the United States.
You cannot make America great again by being rude, bullying, insulting and mocking whoever does not agree with you. That attitude does not help to build a greater America.
You cannot make America great again by being condescending towards prisoners of war. While some Americans where being made prisoners of war, Donald Trump was enjoying a comfortable living in the security of his home.
You cannot make America great again by lowering the political debate to a level never seen before.
You cannot make America great again by considering that dictatorship is synonymous of strong leadership. Under this angle, Hitler would be a great leader and we all know the consequences of his actions. Give the presidency to a gigantic and uncontrolled ego and the Americans, as well as the rest of the world, will pay the price.
You cannot make America great again by ridiculing Mexico, an extremely important neighbour. This country is a major commercial partner of the United States and has also a fantastic culture, for whoever is curious enough to open a book and read about it. But it takes curiosity and the feeling that there are other important people around the world than oneself.
You cannot make America great again if the republican vice-president and president nominees contradict each other about very serious matters on national TV, and if the vice-president nominee finds himself unable to defend the presidential nominee’s positions.
You cannot make America great again if the republican presidential nominee does not understand the consequences of being a populist nationalist. The Germans went through that in the past. I have included a video that is worth taking the time to listen to:
Let’s just hope that the current resentment from having received over one million refugees in Germany in a very short time frame will not help the extreme right to gain momentum and repeat the mistakes of the past.
You cannot make America great again by governing on fear. That does not make for a great future. You then have a population who needs several guns per person in order to be able to sleep at night.
You cannot make America great again if you continue to push for the population to be armed like no other country in the world. The shootings among Americans places the country in the top most violent country in the world. You can make America greater by reducing the number of guns in circulation and increasing the control on who can acquire guns.
You cannot make America great again if you do not understand, as a President, what is really going on in Syria in 2016. Summing it up to a simplistic description only adds to the confusion. In Syria, there are war crimes being perpetrated. The civil population and hospitals are deliberately targeted to protect and improve strategic military positions.
You cannot make America great again by stating that Hillary Clinton will be sent to jail if you are elected as President of the United States. This is done under authoritarian regimes around the world, and certainly is not a promise that will help the United States increase its credibility in the free world.
You cannot make America great again by destabilizing your NATO allies, or saying that you would use the nuclear bomb against Europe if necessary.
You cannot make America great again by promising that you will put forward tax reforms that will hurt your own businesses. Somebody who has fought to keep his hotels and casinos alive will not suddenly change his mind if elected President and start putting in place measures that will endanger what he has taken so much time to protect. It is nonsense. The person who is well positioned to modify a tax code that could hurt companies is someone who does not himself own the targeted companies.
You cannot make America great again by electing somebody who hates very frequent briefings. Being President of the United States requires being available, interested and able to listen to the frequent daily briefings. You must have the personality to cope with them, even if you would like to be somewhere else.
You cannot make America great again by staying silent on how to realistically lower the difference in revenues between Americans. I am not talking about equality between revenues, but lowering the extremes between the rich and the poor. This would certainly help to bring the American dream back to life, lower the social tensions and crime rate and give more sense to the theme “Make America great again…”. But I guess we are not there yet…
The 2016 televised political debates on CNN between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump put forward the topic of racism in the United States. Chicago was specifically mentioned as it detains the national record for violent deaths. The book “Histoire de Chicago” allows, among other subjects, to better understand what feeds social inequalities between Blacks and Whites since the creation of Chicago.
The reader understands that it is not the cultural deficiencies that are at the base of the problems but an institutionalized racism and the economic choices of the different municipal administrations.
The city grew set against a background in which the color of a person’s skin determined the type of work that he or she was allowed to occupy. Eventually, even urban planning was designed so that Blacks and Whites would be separated: the artificial walls created by the construction of the Dan Ryan Expressway or the Dearborn Park are in themselves good examples.
In 2016, the polls show a strong support for the Unites States republican candidate Donald Trump. Trump knows Chicago very well and he had his “Trump Tower” built there.
The republican candidate takes over in his political platform some of the elements that have made the popularity and success of the Daley family who ruled over Chicago for decades: the exploitation of fear between ethnical groups to build and maintain a political power, the idea of building a wall and the use of torture as a simplistic solution to complex problems.
This populism attracts a certain class of American electors who are easily scared by the differences between people and cultures.
The book “Histoire de Chicago” is very much a reflection of what is happening today and the authors do no fear to raise delicate political subjects.
Cover of the book “Histoire de Chicago” by Andrew Diamond and Pap Ndiaye
Chicago
Chicago became a territory of the United States with the Treaty of Paris in 1783. Subsequently, natives progressively lost their lands through different manoeuvers, among them the signature of contracts while they were drunk. Around 1830, when the Indians were definitely gone, the speculative fever started.
Railways
Starting around 1860, Chicago organized itself to become the main hub for the most important railway companies of the United States. The city grew very quickly. Passengers, livestock, cereals and other merchandise had to transit through Chicago. The city depended on the train to grow, and the railway companies depended on Chicago to be profitable.
The rapid growth of Chicago’s population was essentially the driver of migration from Europe (Irish, Germans, Polish and Italians). The evolving and often violent relationships between Chicago’s ethnic groups is well explained in the book.
Retail stores
Just before 1900, the Chicago population witnessed the creation of the first retail stores in which a customer could order through a catalogue and use credit. New categories of employees and managers were added to the working population and helped shape the middle class.
Black immigration in Chicago
Around 1910, there was an important increase in the Black immigration coming from southern United States. Chicago was an abolitionist city. This does not mean that it was favoring racial equality but that it was against slavery. In fact, Chicago progressively became the most segregated city in the United States.
Blacks were massively arriving from southern United States, not only for economic reasons but also to get away from the slavery, racial violence and segregation that was the norm in multiple states. Although far from ideal, the situation in Chicago was better than in the south of the country.
The First World War considerably reduced the number of immigrants coming from Europe. This created a serious problem for a city that was benefiting from numerous military contracts and needed a very high number of employees in its manufacturing companies. This also favored the “great migration”, which is to say “the spectacular intensification of the Afro-American migration towards the North-East and Middle West major urban centers […]” (p.143)
Chicago’s slaughterhouses
Chicago was renowned for the very high number of its slaughterhouses, in particular its pork slaughterhouses. The smell and pollution created by this activity was terrible. Chemical laboratories allowed for the commercial use of all parts of an animal. The writer Georges Duhamel wrote in his book that in Chicago “nothing leaves the slaughterhouse but the squeal” (p.63).
Black workers did not have the right to work in the Chicago steel industry and had to limit themselves to slaughterhouses where they were hired as manual workers. They had no access to qualified jobs.
The Second World War
During the Second World War, Chicago was competing with other major American cities to obtain huge military contracts. The city did not manage its efforts to show it supported the American government. Chicago eventually received billions of dollars for the construction of tanks, tractors, torpedoes, bombs and aircrafts (among them the B-29 bomber aircraft).
To compensate for the lack of manpower, since a lot of men enrolled as volunteers and had gone to war, women massively entered the workforce. Employers saw an opportunity to maximize their profits by reducing the salaries of working women, which corresponded only to 65% of the men’s salary for the same work. This represents the way women were thanked for their effort and collaboration.
Transformation of the Chicago economy
A United Airlines Boeing B747 is taxiing over the expressway at the Chicago O’Hare international airport (on aviation postcard)
Chicago experienced a profound transformation during the ‘70 s. The closure of the slaughterhouses in 1971, and the diminishing demand for steel mills products signalled the end of the industrial era. It was followed by an opening on the international and the development of a new economy based on specialized services like finance, real estate, insurance, marketing, publicity and legal services.
The Chicago mayor, Richard M. Daley, fostered the establishment of a new socio-professional class of creators in the city (design, arts, music, etc.) by considering it like another “ethnic group” who needed privileged space to express itself.
The development of housing estates and complexes during the ‘60s and ‘70 s
During the ‘60s and ‘70s, the Chicago landscape was profoundly modified. Huge housing estates and complexes were built (Magnificent Mile, Sandburgh Village, Marina City, Lake Point Tower, Dearborn Park) where the White population lived, in the north part of the city. The Chicago Tribune said of Dearborn Park that it was “a fortress reserved for Whites and aimed at protecting the financial district against the Blacks”.
The Daley administration had to fight against urban sprawling and consequently favored the construction of skyscrapers to maintain the presence of Whites in the central area while receiving more property taxes. Two stock exchange institutions were created, the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT) and the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME). The creation of those two institutions as well as of the complexes did not do anything to change the dynamic between the Whites and the Blacks.
The racial segregation
Although Martin Luther King was a dominant figure in the fight for the civil rights of the Blacks in the United States, the authors underline that the black population of Chicago had not waited for a leader to promote their rights as they had already started to mobilize themselves years before.
Martin Luther King’s ideas on the integration of Blacks did not receive the support of everyone in the black community, especially the Chicago black politicians who benefited from a special treatment from the Daley machine, which favored the status quo.
Chicago’s mayor Richard M. Daley experienced much success. To stay in power, the Daley Machine “rested squarely on the continued separation and competition between communities”. (p.322-323) The separation between Blacks and Whites was planned and maintained. There was and there are still two Chicagos.
A highway, the Dan Ryan Expressway, was even positioned in such a way that it would create an artificial wall between the Daley’ s district, Bridgeport and the Black Belt: “This was the most massive obstacle that the city could build, other than a wall, to separate the white South Side from the Black Belt” (p.259).
The Daley Machine
We cannot talk about Chicago without underlining the importance of the Daley family and its political machine: “Through an authoritarian control of the “machine”, Richard J. Daley and his son Richard M. Daley, each one in his own style, dominated the Chicago political scene for forty-three years, between 1955 and 2011.
During that period which saw the development and the subsequent decline of modern civil rights, the ghettoization of huge parts of the West Side and South Side, a massive immigration wave from Latin America and the transformation of the city from an industrial giant to a world-class global services economy center, Chicago barely knew one legitimate municipal election or one real debate at the municipal council” (p.16)
There was rampant corruption and secret budgets in the Daley administration. In total opaqueness, the City Hall diverted the funds reserved to disadvantaged neighbourhood and distributed it to the privileged ones.
“[…] While important businessmen, Mafiosi and others who had links with the Daley machine were getting richer, Blacks and Latinos in need were shot in the street or tortured in the precinct’s’ back rooms” (p.394)
Law firms and entrepreneurs gave huge sums of money in exchange for important contracts. The Daley Machine was never short of money.
Beechcraft N35 Bonanza N545T in flight during the years when the Daley family was reigning over Chicago (on aviation postcard)
Racial tensions and repression policies under Mayor Daley
“By the 1930s, Chicago had become, according to the historian Frank Donner “the national capital for police repression” (p.321)
The black migration that took place during the 1940s and 1950s scared the Chicago population that felt besieged. This increased racial tensions that were already present and maintained. It was easier to accept more policemen than social housing.
The muscled tactics of Mayor Daley were the most obvious during the 1968 Democrat Convention, when policemen and 7000 National Guard soldiers “went down hard on the [crowd of 10,000 young protesters] in an explosion of mindless violence” (p.315)
The exploitation of racial fears was quite successful. Daley was defending his policies by saying that “ most people are more worried about a black uproar than of a mayor that orders the use of lethal force to put an end to it and they recognized themselves far less in pacific protesters than in policemen that hit them with truncheons” (p.319).
Media propaganda and the Daley Machine’s police were efficient in convincing the Blacks to respect the established order. Torture was common in the zone 2’s precinct, in the South Side, between 1972 and 1991.
The expected arrival of a new black mayor, Harold Washington, during the 1980’s, increased the fear that everything would change in Chicago. Everything was done to undermine Washington’s candidacy, but he eventually won helped by the black vote.
There were several left-wing political movements which all had their own objectives and were unable to unite under the same progressist banner. This provided the necessary margin of manoeuver to the Daley Machine, who worked in cooperation with the federal authorities to organize the state repression.
Back cover of the book “Histoire de Chicago”
Social problems in disadvantaged neighbourhoods
During the 1995 heat wave, 739 persons died in Chicago. The social precarity helped increase the number of deaths, but it was easier to determine that the victims were responsible of their fate.
The Blacks and Latinos believed, and still do, that the problems related to their school system and neighbourhoods come from some cultural deficiencies, but in trying to understand the real nature of their problems, they overlook the ongoing racism and economic choices of the different city administrations since the creation of the city.
“The 1980 census showed that ten out of sixteen of the poorest neighbourhoods in United States were in Chicago, in the Black Belt, of course”(p.334)
In 2002, Chicago was the American murder capital, with 647 victims. In 2008-2009, the city held the record of students killed in public schools which were gang related.
Today, there are two Chicagos
Today, Chicago benefits from well-defined ethnic neighbourhoods that attract tourists in search of diversity. However, the sustained racial segregation policies have isolated the black neighbourhoods and in 2016 Chicago still has the sad reputation of being the murder capital of the United States.
“The Chicago situation looks more and more like a science-fiction scenario. While part of the city has an economic capacity that sets it among the five first in the world, the other part is frozen in an austerity situation that could very well become irreversible” (p.443)
Twin Otter Series 400 parked in Victoria, British-Columbia, in 2016
Knowing I would spend some time in Victoria in 2016, I planned a visit of the Viking Air Ltd installations, the Canadian company who now builds the famous Twin Otter Series 400. This company is unknown from a majority of Canadians since its production is essentially exported. Out of one hundred aircrafts produced so far, only two were bought by a Canadian company. Viking also offers maintenance service for the Twin Otter Series 100 to 300 in activity around the world.
In the foreground, a Twin Otter Series 400 built by Viking in Victoria, British-Columbia. In the background, a CL-215 water bomber recently acquired by Viking. It will possibly be modified into the more powerful CL-415 version .
In the beginning of 2016, Bombardier and Viking sealed a commercial deal that now makes Viking the new owner of the patents and designs for the CL-215 and CL-415 water bombers. Viking not only services the existing Twin Otters but is evaluating the possibility of restarting the production of the CL-415 water bombers. All is resting on the demand. But with more extreme meteorological conditions fueling a growing number of major forest fires, one can expect that within the next few years Viking will reactivate the production.
In Victoria, a Twin Otter Series 400 on floats built by Viking has been bought by Reignwood Air. It is ready for delivery to China (2016).
With the on-going regulatory changes actually taking place in China, Viking is confident to see an increase in its orders for the Twin Otter Series 400 on floats. The company will receive, at their Victoria installations in 2016, the first flight simulator essentially dedicated to training pilots on the Twin Otter on floats.
A Viking’s Twin Otter Series 400 in Victoria ready for delivery to Russia
For now, Russia is Viking’s most important customer despite the ups and downs linked to the political crisis between that country and Ukraine combined with a ruble devaluation that have forced a slowdown in the production of aircrafts destined to Russian companies. With the recent stabilization in the political situation, Viking has been able to hire back numerous workers which now brings the count to at least 350 employees, if my memory does not fail me.
Turbo Otter DHC-3T C-GVTO in Victoria, Canada, in 2016
Nowadays, most Canadians ignore that a Canadian company has restarted the production of the Twin Otters and is evaluating the possibility of also relaunching the production of the CL-415 water bombers. In the meantime, some CL-215s recently acquired by Viking will possibly be transformed into the more powerful CL-415 version. The only thing now missing for Viking is an important order from a Canadian company: that would make its name as well-known as Bombardier or De Havilland.
For other articles on aviation and photography, click on the following link: Aviation photography
“Patrick Cockburn spotted the emergence of ISIS much earlier than anybody else and wrote about it with a depth of understanding that was in a league of its own.” – Press Gazette Journalist of the Year Judges
The book presents a bigger picture of what is happening in the Middle East than what we are normally allowed to watch in the news. The reader is presented with both sides of several stories and this really helps to get a better understanding of the different conflicts.
Cover of Patrick Cockburn’s book “The Rise of Islamic State”
Of lies and limited accuracy of the news
The author shows how lies are easily fabricated on a battlefield. He also explains the limited accuracy of news reports, such as when a “chosen” reporter is travelling, protected by an army or when reporters use second-hand information (often not verified) to prepare their news reports. It also seems pretty hard for a news channel to refuse to air a story when there are doubts about it, especially when all the competitors are reporting the same news.
I am including quotes (in italic) from the book as they provide excellent summaries. Some are from the author himself, others are from the sources he found to write his book. The author addresses so many subjects that it impossible to cover everything in a small review like the present one. So I’ll be as succinct as possible to present the reader with a broad idea of the book’s content.
Fear
Fear is the main factor behind many irrational political decisions. Fear leads to radical policies, religions and propaganda. It is often related to the fact that a very small group of people leading a country, a state or a region think that they can lose the political power that gives them undue privileges over the rest of their population. The greater the advantages, the greater the fear.
The political “solutions”, most of the time irrational, create tensions or aggravate the existing problems and only help to increase instability.
Saudi Arabia was initially helping ISIS because of fear of Jihadists operating within Saudi Arabia and fear of Shia powers abroad. As for Turkey, it is more afraid of the Kurds than it is of ISIS. So for a long period of time, it kept its border with Syria open: it helped ISIS to maintain a rear base.
The author says: “There is something hysterical and exaggerated about Saudi fear of Shia expansionism, since the Shia are powerful only in the handful of countries where they are in the majority or are a strong minority. Of fifty-seven Muslim countries, just four have a Shia majority” (p.102)
The demonization of religions other than Wahhabism
In the case of Saudi Arabia, the demonization of religions other than Wahhabism and the spreading of hate through social media have created a fertile ground for ISIS to grow.
The author says: “[…] The Saudis need a serious attempt to reform their educational system which currently demonizes Shias, Sufis, Christians, Jews and other sects and religions. They need to stop the preaching of hate from so many satellite stations, and not allow a free ride for their preachers of hate on the social media”.(p.107)
“The “Wahhabization” of mainstream Sunni Islam is one of the most dangerous development of our era” (p.108)
Money helps increase the polarization between Sunni and Shia
ISIS could not have risen without the financial help from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Turkey. Since ISIS thrives on tensions between Sunni and Shia, anything that increase that tension will benefit this terrorist group: “There is no doubt that well-financed Wahhabi propaganda has contributed to the deepening and increasingly violent struggle between Sunni and Shia” (p.99)
“A crucial feature in the rise of Wahhabism is the financial and political might of Saudi Arabia. Dr Allawi says that if, for example, a pious Muslim wants to found a seminary in Bangladesh, there are not many places he can obtain £20,000 other than from Saudi Arabia. But if the same person wants to oppose Wahhabism, then he will have “to fight with limited resources”” (p. 108)
“This polarization between the two religious groups was only intensified by the hot and cold war between the US and Russia. Proxies were at play here with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf monarchies, backed by the US, facing off against Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah in Lebanon, supported by Russia”(p.71)
Back cover of Patrick Cockburn’s book: “The Rise of Islamic State”
Propaganda that made al-Qaeda look stronger and more effective than it actually was, with reference to the 9/11 attacks
There are multiple sections in the book which relate to the September 11th 2001 attacks. Here are some of the author’s observations (in italic). I have also added some personal comments which are clearly identified as such:
The Pearl Harbour moment of the 9/11 attacks
The author says: “The shock of 9/11 provided a Pearl Harbor moment in the US when public revulsion and fear could be manipulated to implement a pre-existing neo-conservative agendaby targeting Saddam Hussein and invading Iraq”(p.100).
Note: the following four paragraphs are my personal comments on the “Pearl Harbor moment”:
A “Pearl Harbor” moment means that in order for the American public to approve an attack in a foreign country, it needed to see something terrible happening in the United States. For example, before the very obvious destruction of war ships at Pearl Harbor by the Japanese, the American population refused to be engaged in World War 2.
During the 9/11 attacks and later on, the Pentagon’s eighty cameras have not captured anything close to a Boeing hitting the building. You had to believe that it happened the way the news told you since there were no pictures and no videos of a Boeing close to or in pieces on the Pentagon property.
The Medias showed instead, over and over, the World Trade Center Twin Towers crashing to the ground after being hit by one aircraft, even though the buildings were built to resist multiple impacts, through a “mesh” design, a lesson learned after what happened on the Empire State Building years ago. Some people believed that the buildings crumbled due to the high temperature, but most neglected the FEMA’s report that got out later on stating that the temperature never rose above 300 or 400 degrees in the buildings, hundreds of degrees short from what was needed to melt steel.
The free-falling towers of the World Trade Center were the Pearl Harbor moment needed to instill fear and facilitate the implementation of a pre-existing neo-conservative agenda. The American voters would not have approved a war abroad if the buildings had been standing after a single impact. It’s almost like the world should believe that the World Trade Center was built using the poorest American engineering possible, while not learning from lessons of the past. For more info on this specific subject:
In 2001, al-Qaeda was an “ineffectual” organization
Mr Cockburn is one of very few reporters who is not afraid to present al-Qaeda as it really was in 2001, an emerging organization that was far from being able to mastermind and execute complex attacks such as the 9/11 attacks. (This also explains why, soon after the attacks, international news reports presented a video of Ben Laden denying responsibility for the attacks. A video that was not shown ever again. But millions of people saw it before it was censored by the main news channels).
“At the time of 9/11, al-Qaeda was a small, generally ineffectual organization” (p.59). The term “ineffectual” refers to the inability to produce a desired effect.
The implementation of the neo-conservative agenda
This really means that the pre-existing American neo-conservative agenda could not rely on Al-Qaeda’s experience. Instead, one or more experienced organizations were needed for the financing, planning and execution of the 9/11 attacks. Only after the facts could the blame be put on Al Qaeda since it was, after all the media propaganda, very well-known to the American public. An artificial link was then made with Iraq, allowing for an invasion that sixty percent of the American voters approved.
Sixty percent of the US voters were misled
“The name al-Qaeda has always been applied flexibly when identifying an enemy. In 2003 and 2004 in Iraq, as armed Iraqi opposition to the American and British-led occupation mounted, US officials attributed most attacks to Al-Qaeda, though many were carried out by nationalist and Baathist groups. Propaganda like this helped to persuade nearly 60 percent of US voters prior to the Iraq invasion that there was a connection between Saddam Hussein and those responsible for 9/11, despite the absence of any evidence for this. In Iraq itself, indeed throughout the entire Muslim world, these accusations have benefited al-Qaeda by exaggerating its role in the resistance to the US and British occupation” (p. 53).
The fall of Mosul
ISIS needed only 6000 fighters to win the Battle of Mosul. Yet, they were facing one million Iraqi soldiers. How was that possible? The author sees three reasons:
The cooperation from the Iraqi Sunnis, who were sensing that they would be better off with ISIS than the Shias.
Corruption at all levels in the Iraqi army. “As one former minister put it “the Iraqi government is an institutionalized kleptocracy”. Another politician who does not want to be named says “[…] People pay money to get into the army [so they can get a salary] – but they are investors not soldiers” (p.77)
The fact that the Iraqi army was no longer a national army since the well-trained Iraqi Sunni soldiers were sidelined.
Syria: President Bachar Assad was not as weak as expected
Both the outside world and opposition viewed President Assad as far weaker than he actually was. They both thought that he would be defeated without an organized air campaign.
A major oversight on the war in Syria
“A blind spot for the US and other Western powers has been their failure to see that by supporting the armed uprising in Syria, they would inevitably destabilize Iraq and provoke another round of its sectarian civil war” (p.73)
Five different conflicts within Syria
The Syrian conflict is extremely complicated since there are many different political and religious interests at stake: “The Syrian crisis comprises five different conflicts that cross-infect and exacerbate each other. The war commenced with a genuine popular revolt against a brutal and corrupt dictatorship, but it soon became intertwined between the Sunni against the Alawites, and that fed into the Shia-Sunni conflict in the region as a whole, with a standoff between the US, Saudi Arabia and the Sunni states on the one side, and Iran, Iraq and the Lebanese Shia on the other. In addition to this, there is a revived cold war between Moscow and the West, exacerbated by the conflict in Libya and more recently made even worse by the crisis in the Ukraine” (p.94)
In Syria, it is either Assad or ISIS
ISIS is the strongest opposition force in Syria. If Assad falls, ISIS takes his place: “Syrians have to choose between a violent dictatorship, in which the power is monopolized by the presidency and brutish security services, or an opposition that shoots children in the face for minor blasphemy and sends pictures of decapitated soldiers to the parents of their victims.” (p.81)
The God-given victories
“The appeal of the Islamic State to Sunni Muslims in Syria, Iraq, and across the world comes in part from a sense that its victories are God-given and inevitable, so any failure damages its claim to divine support” (p.159)
The solution to the Syrian conflict will come from outside the country
“Many Syrians now see the outcome of their civil war resting largely with the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. In this, they are probably right”.
Side notes
War is never about “combat” only. There is always an underlying political process going on. So, even if a country seems defeated militarily, enormous political efforts will have to be made in order to create a new stable order.
“Conviction that a toxic government is the root of all evil is the public position of most oppositions, but it is dangerous to trust one’s own propaganda”.
“A government or an army can try to maintain secrecy by banning reporters but they will pay the price as the vacuum of news is filled with information supplied by their enemies”.
The transformation of Business, Democracy and Everyday Life
Robert B. Reich “Supercapitalism”
Robert B. Reich is a professor at the Berkeley University in California. He also worked for the American government under President Bill Clinton as secretary of labour.
Here is a quote from the New York Times on their review of “Supercapitalism”: “Reich documents in lurid detail the explosive growth of corporate lobbying expenditures and campaign contributions since the 1970s. . . . Supercapitalism is a grand debunking of the conventional wisdom in the style of John Kenneth Galbraith”.
Ferocious competition on an international scale
During the first few decades that followed the Second World War, before the globalization of the economy, the author shows that in United States, profits derived from mass production were based on rules that insured stability. There was a better redistribution of a company’s profits between workers, shareholders and managers. The CEO even had the possibility to take decisions that would benefit to both the society and his company. The middle class was in better shape.
At the same time as capitalism progressively gained terrain around the planet, increasing inequalities of incomes and wealth followed. The rise of supercapitalism, around the 70s, is due to the globalization of the economy and, consequently, to an increase of the international competition. Consumers and investors have been benefiting a lot from supercapitalism, but the citizen who feels a social responsibility and looks for the common good gradually lost ground.
The “consumer/investor” versus the “citizen”
The author writes that each person is of two minds: a “consumer and investor” but also a “citizen”. The consumer wants to acquire quality goods at low price and the investor wishes that the money invested towards his retirement provides a great rate of return. If the consumer finds a better price somewhere else, and if the investor considers that the return on investment (ROI) is not adequate, both will look towards the competition.
Meanwhile, the “citizen” in us wishes only good things for the society and the planet: companies must respect the environment; workers must have decent working conditions, etc. The paradox is that while we want the best, we encourage the worst.
Wishing the best while encouraging the worst
The fact that a superstore does not offer good working conditions to his employees irritates the “citizen” in us. However, the superstore’s lower operating costs allow us to save money. If prices go up, we will buy somewhere else.
As investors, we possess, through our mutual funds, numerous financially performing companies. In many countries around the world, profits redistributed to shareholders are the result of minimal working conditions given to employees and abuse on the environment. The investor regularly compares the rate of return of several mutual funds and other investments and he will not hesitate to sell his shares if profits are insufficient.
Increased pressure on the company’s CEO
Globalization and increased competition are forcing managers to think only in terms of return on investment. The CEO is accountable to his dissatisfied shareholders and mutual fund managers who both can sell their shares of an underperforming company.
Consequently, the role of a CEO is not to spend for reasons that would please the “citizen”, but instead to maximize profits using all the legal means at his disposal. This way, he satisfies the consumer and investor. He knows that all his competitors do the same.
As citizens, our role is to forbid companies to establish the rules of the game. Those rules must be set by the government in order to preserve democracy and encourage social responsibility.
Companies are not against new rules that would apply globally to all competitors. What they want to avoid is that a specific company benefits more than another one in the new deal.
Winning or preserving a competitive advantage because of lobbyists
Considering the strong international competition between companies, it is easy to understand that massive amounts of money and other efforts deployed to gain a competitive advantage are in constant growth.
After having worked in Washington, the experienced politician is hired by big corporations as a lobbyist (3% in 1970, 30% in 2005). While the politician’s attention is focused on consumers and investors, the citizen’s voice wishing a greater social equality is not heard.
Supercapitalism thus modifies the way the democratic system operates.
Mutual benefits between politicians and lobbyists
Politicians use that competition to demand important amounts of money to finance their political campaign. In exchange, they support and help push the agenda of a specific company: “That’s how politicians keep their hold on power, and lobbyists keep their hold on money”.
Democracy is perverted by the actions of lobbyists and the attraction that money and other advantages has on politician’s decisions. The government is not managed from the inside but by external powerful economic interests.
Better regulations can improve democracy
The author writes that companies cannot take personal initiatives to correct the situation since it will undermine their position towards other competitors in a global market. “Supercapitalism does not permit acts of corporate virtue that erode the bottom line. No company can “voluntarily” take on extra cost that its competitors don’t also take on, which is why, under supercapitalism, regulations are the only means of getting companies to do things that hurt their bottom lines”. Regulations can only be imposed by political actions.
Learn to recognize the actions used to distract the population
It is necessary for citizens and Medias to recognize the half-truths and distortions that “confound efforts to prevent supercapitalism from overrunning democracy”. The author names a few:
The public blame that changes nothing: beware of politicians who publicly blame corporations for actions that respect the law but that the public despise. The corporation works for the consumer and investor, not for the citizen. A public blame is easy and makes the politician look good. The latter must instead work at improving the law and corporations will then be forced to respect the new parameters.
The corporation that pretends to act on behalf of the public interest: do not believe a corporation that says it works for the public good. It is not its role. It is possible that, in order to improve its image or to satisfy the consumer (and ultimately its shareholders), it does something that looks like it is good for the public. But, basically, there is no acknowledgment of the public good, only a desire to preserve or improve its competitive position.
Lobbyists who pretend to look for the public good: lobbyists and experts who pretend that their initiatives are in the public interest only detract attention from their real objectives that are to protect or advantage a specific corporation.
The private sector and the “voluntary” cooperation: beware of politicians who claim that the public can count on the voluntary cooperation of the private sector in order to protect the public good. It is not the private sector’s role and it will not spend any money unless all of its competitors do the same. Those are only words aimed at buying time and confuse the public. If the public good is so important, then a law must be voted.
Public relation campaigns aimed at one specific corporation: beware of public relation campaigns and pressure groups working to force a specific company to be more socially virtuous. Try to discover the real goals behind those efforts. If all this seems reasonable to you, then ask yourself if a new law or new regulations forcing all the competing corporations to modify their behaviour would better serve the public.
Conclusion
A final quote summarizes very well the author’s thoughts: “In general, corporate responsibilities to the public are better addressed in the democratic process than inside corporate boardrooms. Reformers should focus on laws or regulations they seek to change, and mobilize the public around changing them”.
