“What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?” – Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948)
Around 330 BC, in his attempt to reach “the ends of the world and the Great Outer Sea”, the Greek king, Alexander the Great, drove his armies across the vast plains of Syria, Mesopotamia and Persia and conquered the lands that today roughly correspond to Afghanistan and Pakistan. As Genghis Khan would experience fifteen hundred years later, Alexander’s armies found the rugged terrain and brutal climatic conditions of the Af-Pak region to be extremely inhospitable and morale shattering; so much so that as the great warrior drove his men relentlessly forward towards the borders of India, he was eventually forced to turn back by the near mutiny of his soldiers. Over the centuries, waves of conquerors have descended on these ancient lands, positioning the region at the crossroads of the historic trade routes between the great cities of Rome and Athens in the West and India and China in the east.
Eight years after the invasion of Afghanistan in the aftermath of 9/11, President Obama is at a crossroads in determining the way forward for U.S. foreign policy in what is no longer being referred to as the war in Afghanistan, but rather the broader Af-Pak strategy. After vanquishing the Taliban back in October 2001, the general consensus is that the United States took its eye completely off the ball by focusing its international war on terror almost exclusively in Iraq. While the U.S. was preoccupied in Iraq, Osama bin Laden found refuge in the arms of his Taliban kin, the same mujahideen he fought alongside in the 1980’s against the Soviets, and who now control the mountain landscape that borders the countries of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Under the ineffective rule of Bush puppet, President Hamid Karzai, the Taliban in Afghanistan have reinvented themselves and are now back to pre 9/11 strength. Karzai’s inability, or unwillingness, to tame the resurgence of the Taliban and to stamp out the widespread corruption that exists within his administration has led to a perceptible cooling in relations with the United States. Accusations of extensive fraud in Afghanistan’s recent elections have contributed to President Obama’s insistence on revaluating the entire United States mission in that country.
The sovereign nation of Pakistan was formed in 1947 after the northwestern part of what was then British India was carved off from the rest of India to become an autonomous state in its own right, the home to millions of Indian Muslims. Many military and political strategists believe that Pakistan, rather than Afghanistan, is where the United States should be placing most of its military, economic and diplomatic efforts in any new regional strategy to be announced by the President. Even though Pakistan was a U.S. ally during the CIA funded war of the Afghani mujahideen against the Soviets in the 1980’s, relations soured quickly thereafter when Pakistan refused to abandon its nuclear program, an issue that has now come front and central for the Obama administration. Former Pakistani president during the post 9/11 era of George Bush’s war on terror, Pervez Musharraf proved to be an ineffective and prickly ally, who like his counterpart Karzai in Afghanistan, was unable or unwilling to tame the rise of the Taliban within his own country. The fear now for the Obama administration, in addition to the resurgence of the Taliban, who are natural allies of Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, is that Pakistan’s nuclear capability could fall into the hands of an insurgent force like the Taliban, the potential impact of which could be catastrophic.
Right now, the usual motley crew of foreign policy hawks are talking up America’s need to recommit itself to bringing stability to the region, taking the war on terror to its enemies and spreading so called democracy. This is the same mantra we heard in Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Afghanistan (in the 1980’s and in 2001) and Iraq, a mention just a few. The military, industrial, intelligence and political nexus that controls the Pentagon, CIA, Department of Defense, Wall Street and the Republican Party have controlled the foreign policy of the United States for half a century.
It is unreasonable to expect President Obama to be able to reverse this trend less than one year in to his first term. The President can however demonstrate leadership, vision, respect and responsibility by carefully re-evaluating U.S. foreign policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan and begin recalibrating its mission there. The President was recently awarded the Nobel Peace prize not just for what he has already achieved; both symbolically and through his actions, but also for the change towards peace he can engineer in the matter of U.S. foreign policy and the application of America’s military might. Let us wish him well as he takes on this awesome task.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Saturday, September 12, 2009
The Soul of the Senate...
“For me, a few hours ago, this campaign came to an end. For all those whose cares have been our concern, the works goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die” – Senator Edward M. Kennedy 1932-2009 – concession speech in the campaign for the Democratic nomination for president in 1980 against incumbent Jimmy Carter.
On Saturday, November 23rd 1963, at the request of First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy, the Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara made four separate trips to Arlington Cemetery to survey the burial grounds for a suitable resting place for the dead president. After finding what he believed to be the most beautiful location in the cemetery, McNamara called Mrs. Kennedy and asked her to come to Arlington to make a final decision. At the foot of a hill, atop which stands Arlington House, a memorial to Confederate General Robert E. Lee, and overlooking the Potomac River, Mrs. Kennedy would light the eternal flame for the first time at the gravesite of her dead husband, a flame that has burned ever since. Forty six years later, Edward Moore Kennedy, the last remaining son of Joseph P. Kennedy and Rose Fitzgerald, would travel the same road, passing the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial along the way, before being laid to rest within a hundred feet of his assassinated brothers.
Joe and Rose Kennedy raised their children around the biblical concept of “to whom much is given, much will be required”. Despite the fact that one brother served as president and another as attorney general, Senator Ted Kennedy lived this principal in a way that neither of his brothers ever did, or indeed ever had the opportunity to. Kennedy’s half century of dedication to public service was driven by three key themes; his genuine empathy and consideration for the underprivileged, minorities and the elderly, what he felt was his duty to carry forward the fallen standard and social and economic policies of his slain brothers, and yes, in the aftermath of personal irresponsibility and tragedy at Chappaquiddick, his long road towards redemption by becoming a lightning rod for every just social cause, authoring some 2,500 legislative bills in the United States Senate, covering everything from health care and immigration, civil rights and education reform to promoting gender equity, protecting voting rights and being a lifelong advocate for the working man and woman.
Ted Kennedy was a natural politician in a way that his more famous brothers never were. His brother Jack, the president, was renowned for being cold and detached, a man who cloaked his emotions and even though he spent 14 years in the congress before becoming president, was never at home in the Senate and was not a legislator in the way his contemporary Lyndon Johnson was, not even close. Robert Kennedy, while notoriously shy and often brutally stubborn and harsh in his years as attorney general, was a man of perpetual motion and action, who found the slow process and grind of legislating a terrible chore after he entered the U.S. Senate in January 1965. Teddy was a different story altogether. Politically speaking he was more of a Fitzgerald than a Kennedy.
His maternal grandfather, John F. “Honey Fitz” Fitzgerald (after whom the future president would be named), was the rambunctious, back-slapping, wheeling and dealing former U.S. congressman and later two time mayor of Boston. The tradition of grass roots, ward politics that was symptomatic of the rise of first and second generation Irish immigrants within the Democratic Party in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, was woven into the DNA of Ted Kennedy. Teddy not only loved the U.S. Senate, he loved legislating. He understood, more than anyone, that bipartisanship was a lot more than just a word. Although he was the voice of American liberalism for over forty years and the political nemesis of two generations of conservative Republicans, Kennedy was never afraid to reach across the aisle, wooing Republicans to his cause time after time, convincing them of the morality of the cause at hand, compromising when he needed to, promising his support for future opposition bills, always delivering the votes required to get the legislation passed.
Kennedy loved his Irish heritage and was a lifelong friend of Ireland. As early as 1971 he publicly compared Britain’s military presence in Ireland to that of the U.S. presence in Vietnam. In the 1970’s he helped persuade then President Jimmy Carter to provide U.S. financial support to Northern Ireland in the event of a peace settlement. In 1994, he was the leader among a number of prominent Irish American politicians who convinced President Clinton to grant a US entry visa to Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams. When the IRA subsequently abandoned its ceasefire a couple of years later, Kennedy publicly snubbed Adams, calling on him to once and for all cut his ties to the IRA, and declined to meet him during several consecutive St. Patrick’s Day celebrations in Washington. Behind the scenes however, over the period of twenty five years, he worked with several Irish Taoisigh and British prime ministers to broker a peace settlement in Northern Ireland.
As is often the case, with the passing of time comes wisdom and a perspective that only a history of life experience can bring. As he was being laid to rest at Arlington cemetery, the presiding priest read a letter that Kennedy wrote earlier this year to Pope Benedict XVI. Reflecting on a life of public service and still haunted by the death of Mary Jo Kopechne at Chappaquiddick in 1969, Kennedy, like us all, hoped his life’s good work would help redeem himself in the eyes of his Creator…” I have been blessed to be a part of a wonderful family, and both of my parents, particularly my mother, kept our Catholic faith at the center of our lives. That gift of faith has sustained, nurtured and provided solace to me in the darkest hours. I know that I have been an imperfect human being, but with the help of my faith, I have tried to right my path”. Indeed, he did try.
For the exception of two years, a Kennedy has represented Massachusetts in the United States Senate since 1953. In excess of 140 million Americans, born since January 1963, have never known the Senate without Ted Kennedy in it. It remains to be seen if the torch will be passed to a new generation of Kennedy men or women to pick up where Teddy has left off. As an Irishman living in America, I am proud of the accomplishments of Ted Kennedy. We are all imperfect human beings and we all need GOD’s forgiveness. Let us hope that President Obama, a gutsy and transformative leader, can learn from the career of Ted Kennedy and guide the upcoming Health Care Reform bill through congress and its passage into legislation.
R.I.P., Teddy, the liberal lion and soul of the Senate. To whom much is given, much will be required.
On Saturday, November 23rd 1963, at the request of First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy, the Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara made four separate trips to Arlington Cemetery to survey the burial grounds for a suitable resting place for the dead president. After finding what he believed to be the most beautiful location in the cemetery, McNamara called Mrs. Kennedy and asked her to come to Arlington to make a final decision. At the foot of a hill, atop which stands Arlington House, a memorial to Confederate General Robert E. Lee, and overlooking the Potomac River, Mrs. Kennedy would light the eternal flame for the first time at the gravesite of her dead husband, a flame that has burned ever since. Forty six years later, Edward Moore Kennedy, the last remaining son of Joseph P. Kennedy and Rose Fitzgerald, would travel the same road, passing the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial along the way, before being laid to rest within a hundred feet of his assassinated brothers.
Joe and Rose Kennedy raised their children around the biblical concept of “to whom much is given, much will be required”. Despite the fact that one brother served as president and another as attorney general, Senator Ted Kennedy lived this principal in a way that neither of his brothers ever did, or indeed ever had the opportunity to. Kennedy’s half century of dedication to public service was driven by three key themes; his genuine empathy and consideration for the underprivileged, minorities and the elderly, what he felt was his duty to carry forward the fallen standard and social and economic policies of his slain brothers, and yes, in the aftermath of personal irresponsibility and tragedy at Chappaquiddick, his long road towards redemption by becoming a lightning rod for every just social cause, authoring some 2,500 legislative bills in the United States Senate, covering everything from health care and immigration, civil rights and education reform to promoting gender equity, protecting voting rights and being a lifelong advocate for the working man and woman.
Ted Kennedy was a natural politician in a way that his more famous brothers never were. His brother Jack, the president, was renowned for being cold and detached, a man who cloaked his emotions and even though he spent 14 years in the congress before becoming president, was never at home in the Senate and was not a legislator in the way his contemporary Lyndon Johnson was, not even close. Robert Kennedy, while notoriously shy and often brutally stubborn and harsh in his years as attorney general, was a man of perpetual motion and action, who found the slow process and grind of legislating a terrible chore after he entered the U.S. Senate in January 1965. Teddy was a different story altogether. Politically speaking he was more of a Fitzgerald than a Kennedy.
His maternal grandfather, John F. “Honey Fitz” Fitzgerald (after whom the future president would be named), was the rambunctious, back-slapping, wheeling and dealing former U.S. congressman and later two time mayor of Boston. The tradition of grass roots, ward politics that was symptomatic of the rise of first and second generation Irish immigrants within the Democratic Party in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, was woven into the DNA of Ted Kennedy. Teddy not only loved the U.S. Senate, he loved legislating. He understood, more than anyone, that bipartisanship was a lot more than just a word. Although he was the voice of American liberalism for over forty years and the political nemesis of two generations of conservative Republicans, Kennedy was never afraid to reach across the aisle, wooing Republicans to his cause time after time, convincing them of the morality of the cause at hand, compromising when he needed to, promising his support for future opposition bills, always delivering the votes required to get the legislation passed.
Kennedy loved his Irish heritage and was a lifelong friend of Ireland. As early as 1971 he publicly compared Britain’s military presence in Ireland to that of the U.S. presence in Vietnam. In the 1970’s he helped persuade then President Jimmy Carter to provide U.S. financial support to Northern Ireland in the event of a peace settlement. In 1994, he was the leader among a number of prominent Irish American politicians who convinced President Clinton to grant a US entry visa to Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams. When the IRA subsequently abandoned its ceasefire a couple of years later, Kennedy publicly snubbed Adams, calling on him to once and for all cut his ties to the IRA, and declined to meet him during several consecutive St. Patrick’s Day celebrations in Washington. Behind the scenes however, over the period of twenty five years, he worked with several Irish Taoisigh and British prime ministers to broker a peace settlement in Northern Ireland.
As is often the case, with the passing of time comes wisdom and a perspective that only a history of life experience can bring. As he was being laid to rest at Arlington cemetery, the presiding priest read a letter that Kennedy wrote earlier this year to Pope Benedict XVI. Reflecting on a life of public service and still haunted by the death of Mary Jo Kopechne at Chappaquiddick in 1969, Kennedy, like us all, hoped his life’s good work would help redeem himself in the eyes of his Creator…” I have been blessed to be a part of a wonderful family, and both of my parents, particularly my mother, kept our Catholic faith at the center of our lives. That gift of faith has sustained, nurtured and provided solace to me in the darkest hours. I know that I have been an imperfect human being, but with the help of my faith, I have tried to right my path”. Indeed, he did try.
For the exception of two years, a Kennedy has represented Massachusetts in the United States Senate since 1953. In excess of 140 million Americans, born since January 1963, have never known the Senate without Ted Kennedy in it. It remains to be seen if the torch will be passed to a new generation of Kennedy men or women to pick up where Teddy has left off. As an Irishman living in America, I am proud of the accomplishments of Ted Kennedy. We are all imperfect human beings and we all need GOD’s forgiveness. Let us hope that President Obama, a gutsy and transformative leader, can learn from the career of Ted Kennedy and guide the upcoming Health Care Reform bill through congress and its passage into legislation.
R.I.P., Teddy, the liberal lion and soul of the Senate. To whom much is given, much will be required.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
The Most Trusted Man in America
“People everywhere confuse what they read in newspapers with news.” – A.J. Liebling, American Journalist and writer for “The New Yorker”: 1904 - 1963
Walter Cronkite (b. 1916), the gold standard for journalistic integrity for half a century, died this month in New York City aged 92. The inspiration for a generation of broadcast journalists that includes Tom Brokaw, Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, Ted Koppel, Brian Williams and Tim Russert, Cronkite was the epitome of professionalism and steadiness during a career that represented an “incredible window into 20th century America”.
After dropping out of college, Cronkite joined the then United Press (later UPI) in 1937 and went on to become one of America’s most respected journalists during WWII, covering key campaigns in Africa and Europe, and later the Nuremburg trials of Nazi war criminals. After a stint in the USSR as UPI’s Moscow chief, Cronkite was recruited to join the fledgling television division of CBS News by another giant of the industry, Edward R. Murrow, himself a pioneer of broadcast journalism. At CBS, Cronkite spearheaded the network’s newly initiated television coverage of the 1952 Democratic and Republican party conventions. In fact, the term “anchor”, now part of the lexicon, was coined specifically to describe Cronkite’s role in covering political rallies and election analysis.
Cronkite’s iconic status in America and his influence on the ebb and flow of political discourse and his ability to capture the mood of the nation was cemented during his nineteen year tenure as the host of the CBS Evening News, a role he assumed in April 1962. As anchor, Cronkite covered a wide variety of historic stories that included breaking the news to the American people of the death of President Kennedy, the Apollo moon landing, the Watergate hearings and the Iran hostage crises of 1980. At the height of his influence, in 1968, Cronkite went to Vietnam to assess the war for himself. His reportage was devastating for the administration of Lyndon Johnson and brought the reality of the stalemate of the Vietnam War into every living room in the country. Cronkite’s editorial report of February 1968, in the aftermath of the Tet Offensive, laid bare the reality…”To say that we are closer to victory today is to believe, in the face of evidence, the optimists that have been wrong in the past. To suggest that we are on the edge of defeat is to yield to unreasonable pessimism. To say that we are mired in stalemate seems the only realistic, yet unsatisfactory, conclusion. It is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could”.
At the White House, responding privately to Cronkite’s reporting to close advisors, President Johnson said “…if I’ve lost Cronkite, I have lost Middle America”. A month later Johnson announced he would not seek re-election and began a secret back channel dialogue with the Vietnamese to negotiate a peace settlement (an initiative that was compromised by Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger immediately before the 1968 election).
After retiring in 1981, Cronkite went on to become a much sought after special correspondent for a number of news organizations, covering a variety of international political and cultural events as well as becoming an instantly recognizable narrator of documentaries and period pieces. Asked once what his biggest regret was, Cronkite mused…”What do I regret? Well, I regret that in our attempt to establish some standards, we didn’t make them stick. We couldn’t find a way to pass them on to another generation”. This may be the most damning indictment of the current crop of broadcast journalists, many of whom (although not all, Seymour Hersh and Keith Olbermann being among the few exceptions) are willing pawns in propagandizing the agenda of government, the Pentagon and the other vested interests that drink from the gravy trough in Washington.
Lewis Lapham, long time editor of Harper’s Magazine once wrote, “Long ago in the days before journalists became celebrities, their enterprise was reviled and poorly paid, and it was understood by working newspapermen that the presence of more than two people at their funeral could be taken as a sign that they has disgraced the profession”. Well Cronkite didn’t disgrace his profession. The difference between Cronkite and many of today’s celebrity journalists is that he dared to go places, journalistically speaking, that most of these 21st century “journalists” won’t even consider.
Walter Cronkite (b. 1916), the gold standard for journalistic integrity for half a century, died this month in New York City aged 92. The inspiration for a generation of broadcast journalists that includes Tom Brokaw, Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, Ted Koppel, Brian Williams and Tim Russert, Cronkite was the epitome of professionalism and steadiness during a career that represented an “incredible window into 20th century America”.
After dropping out of college, Cronkite joined the then United Press (later UPI) in 1937 and went on to become one of America’s most respected journalists during WWII, covering key campaigns in Africa and Europe, and later the Nuremburg trials of Nazi war criminals. After a stint in the USSR as UPI’s Moscow chief, Cronkite was recruited to join the fledgling television division of CBS News by another giant of the industry, Edward R. Murrow, himself a pioneer of broadcast journalism. At CBS, Cronkite spearheaded the network’s newly initiated television coverage of the 1952 Democratic and Republican party conventions. In fact, the term “anchor”, now part of the lexicon, was coined specifically to describe Cronkite’s role in covering political rallies and election analysis.
Cronkite’s iconic status in America and his influence on the ebb and flow of political discourse and his ability to capture the mood of the nation was cemented during his nineteen year tenure as the host of the CBS Evening News, a role he assumed in April 1962. As anchor, Cronkite covered a wide variety of historic stories that included breaking the news to the American people of the death of President Kennedy, the Apollo moon landing, the Watergate hearings and the Iran hostage crises of 1980. At the height of his influence, in 1968, Cronkite went to Vietnam to assess the war for himself. His reportage was devastating for the administration of Lyndon Johnson and brought the reality of the stalemate of the Vietnam War into every living room in the country. Cronkite’s editorial report of February 1968, in the aftermath of the Tet Offensive, laid bare the reality…”To say that we are closer to victory today is to believe, in the face of evidence, the optimists that have been wrong in the past. To suggest that we are on the edge of defeat is to yield to unreasonable pessimism. To say that we are mired in stalemate seems the only realistic, yet unsatisfactory, conclusion. It is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could”.
At the White House, responding privately to Cronkite’s reporting to close advisors, President Johnson said “…if I’ve lost Cronkite, I have lost Middle America”. A month later Johnson announced he would not seek re-election and began a secret back channel dialogue with the Vietnamese to negotiate a peace settlement (an initiative that was compromised by Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger immediately before the 1968 election).
After retiring in 1981, Cronkite went on to become a much sought after special correspondent for a number of news organizations, covering a variety of international political and cultural events as well as becoming an instantly recognizable narrator of documentaries and period pieces. Asked once what his biggest regret was, Cronkite mused…”What do I regret? Well, I regret that in our attempt to establish some standards, we didn’t make them stick. We couldn’t find a way to pass them on to another generation”. This may be the most damning indictment of the current crop of broadcast journalists, many of whom (although not all, Seymour Hersh and Keith Olbermann being among the few exceptions) are willing pawns in propagandizing the agenda of government, the Pentagon and the other vested interests that drink from the gravy trough in Washington.
Lewis Lapham, long time editor of Harper’s Magazine once wrote, “Long ago in the days before journalists became celebrities, their enterprise was reviled and poorly paid, and it was understood by working newspapermen that the presence of more than two people at their funeral could be taken as a sign that they has disgraced the profession”. Well Cronkite didn’t disgrace his profession. The difference between Cronkite and many of today’s celebrity journalists is that he dared to go places, journalistically speaking, that most of these 21st century “journalists” won’t even consider.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
