Saturday, May 28, 2011

Assad's genital fixation

Hamza al-Khatib was a 13 year old boy in Syria. He was killed in custody. They cut off his penis.

While it may seem difficult to understand this story, some clues are right before our eyes. This is part of a pattern. Suleiman al-Khalidi wrote a thoughtful piece (Shattered humanity inside Syria's security apparatus) about his days in captivity in Syria, that included this passage: "When they told him to take down his pants, I could see his swollen genitals, tied tight with a plastic cable." 

Genitals seem to be of particular interest to Syrian security forces.

Anyone remember Jeffrey Dahmer? Now imagine that as a state institution. Suddenly Gaddafi appears like an entertaining eccentric, while Mubarak and Ben Ali are saints. 


Friday, May 27, 2011

Assad ♥ Kids

Syria's official news agency today carried a news item that was just too good to let pass without comment. I grabbed the screen shot below, in case they decide to remove the story as they have done in the past.





President Assad issued a decree in which he effectively gives students extra grades. Seriously?

In one swoop, the man demonstrates that:

1. That he is indeed a dictator. (In case anyone had a lingering doubt, he's the dude that can decide to do whatever, whenever).

2. No school or employer should take Syrian students seriously. The grades are determined by the government when the feel like it. Grades do not necessarily reflect your abilities.  (If you want a job, you better suck up to the government to give you a job).

But the decree also raises other possibilities:

1. Assad is still deeply involved in the Bekaa drug trade, and he is testing the quality of the stuff himself.

2. Assad loves the young ones, in the same way that Kim Jong-Il loves the young ones. All that's needed is for him to start putting freaky statues of friendly animals around town.



Source: By (Stephan)

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Introducing Lebanon's very own Buthaina Shaaban

Michel Aoun's press secretary (he actually has one!), May Akl, wrote an outrageous piece for Foreign Policy.

The bottom line is that she dismisses the Syrian demonstrators as Sunni fundamentalists. She is outraged:

"....it would be outrageous -- to say the least -- to think that in Syria, the U.S. position will be aligned with that of Sheikh Youssef al-Qaradawi"

So, basically, the US should oppose something (that is in it's own interest) simply because a lunatic supports it? This, alas, is an excellent example of the Politics of Spite at which Aoun excels.

The underlying fear is evident in this passage:

"...the fall of the Assad regime is very likely to have critical consequences on neighboring countries. From Turkey to Israel, going through Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq, this fall would mean a radical alteration of the political, and more importantly religious, map of the Middle East."

The corollary to this is that the "religious" identity of the politicians is more important than the actual policies. But then, what other analysis can you expect out of Lebanon's sillier sectarian minds?

I've never heard of May Akl before. Apparently she writes occasionally for the Daily Star, just like Buthaina Shaaban. She is a lot more eloquent than her boss, just like Buthaina Shaaban is more eloquent than Assad.  But she does not seems to have actual policy responsibility, just like Buthaina Shaaban. Her only handicap seems to be that she is not a relative of her boss, just like Buthaina Shaaban.


Saturday, April 2, 2011

Setting the Gold Standard in Transparency

Syria's Ministry of Interior, a model of openness and transparency in government, is inviting offers for teargas  on its website.




Update: The government has now removed the original site, but here's the webcache, via Mustapha

Friday, April 1, 2011

Thursday, March 31, 2011

Two reasons to worry about Egypt

Mubarak's fall was one of the most exciting moments in the Middle East in a long while. But I'm not sure that anything we are seeing now is cause for optimism. In a nutshell, here's the problem:

1. Egypt faces impossible choices: I will spare you a diatribe on Egypt's budget and debt dynamics. Suffice it to highlight that on the eve of Egypt's revoltution, the country had a budget deficit of 8% of GDP, depended on Tourism for 20% of its foreign exchange earnings and had expenditures that look like this:

Government Expenditures as % of GDP

 Source: IMF



You are reading this right: the government spends 6.1% of GDP subsidizing fuel (5.1%) and food (1%). In his last action in office, Mubarak raised wages, so the 7.1% spent on wages is now higher than it used to be. But oil prices have also risen globally since then, as have food prices. My point? The government is facing a much bigger bill than is implied by the chart above, and must cut subsidies - but this is likely to get people rioting again!

2. No one knows what Egyptians want: Everyone agrees that Egyptians want democracy, but what else do they want? What are their economic priorities? We don't know, because the country has never been a democracy. To appreciate the depth of this mystery, you need to look no further than the Twitter feed of Wael Ghonim, one of the admirable curators of the Egyptian revolution. A couple of days ago, he was asking people via twitter to suggest topics for him for an editorial he was invited to write.



It is heartwarming that a leading activist is listening to the crowds, but it is also worrisome that the demands of Egyptians are not immediately obvious even to himself! Predictably, the reponses were conflicting:




Yes, it is good to see some people want freer trade, but some people want more government spending from a government that can't even afford to maintain its current spending!

I don't envy the economic policy makers in Egypt. They are damned whatever they do.

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Top 5 reasons why Hafez Assad was better than Bashar

5. Hafez did not pretend to reform. He just didn't reform.
4. Hafez took responsibility for his actions. He did not shy away from assuming responsibility for killing.
3. Hafez was consistent. He did not send mixed messages.
2. Hafez listened to his advisors. He did not say they want to reform, but "I'm holding them back."
1. Hafez did not giggle like a 5 year old girl at his own jokes.

To all "pragmatists" (Hillary Clinton), crypto-intellectuals (David Ignatius), or downright insane (Joshua Landis), eat your own words about Bashar the reformer now.