Love Thy Region

     

Spain’s Constitutional Court killed the Catalan dream, or perhaps let it lay in a coma for some time. The Court decided blocking the independent vote planned by Catalonia’s regional government, leaving the Catalan leaders no choice but suspending the November 9^th independence referendum. The Court argued that the 1978 constitution requires a majority of Spaniards to be consulted on any issue of sovereignty; since they were not, then the vote is simply unconstitutional. However, the regional government will not shy away from challenging the Court’s decision as it plans to appeal it. After all, the region's 5.4 million voters have been taken by the romanticized dream of independence from a lazy, impoverished and corrupt south – and west. What recently happened in Scotland was not a bad omen to the region’s enthusiastic separatists; over-confidence, pride, strong belief in the cause or sheer cussedness may explain the region’s will to fight for the referendum. Pro-independence citizens' groups in Catalonia are equally active, scheduling rallies to promote the referendum anyway.

     To force a group of people to be part of a state against their will is against every interpretation of a democratic and free society. Prohibiting a nation from establishing its own state also goes against democracy; it is equal to denying the right of Palestinians to establish their own state. But what is also an aggression to the free-will is the manipulation of a set of elite actors, intellectuals and positions of masses to rally around the cause of nationalism. First, a quick definition of a nation, quoting Montserrat Guibernau: “a human group conscious of forming a community, sharing a common culture, attached to a clearly demarcated territory, having a common past  and a common project for the future and claiming the right to rule itself. Thus, in my view, the “nation” includes five dimensions: psychological (consciousness of forming a group), cultural, territorial, political and historical”. Enjoying a common culture, language and tradition does indeed distinguish one nation or a set of people from the whole, but it does not necessarily feed the urge of marking the separation nor inventing the separation. Searching for symbols, myths of origin and a glorified inherited code-of conduct is a mechanism implied by separatists to inflame mass emotions and intensify their sense of pride in their separate being.

    Civicism or criticism – or belonging and loving one’s home-city – is a similar form of nationalism that is spreading, with global cities emerging and competing for the affection of their residents. Residents of these cities take pride in the particular ways of life of their own cities. A romantic Paris, an intellectual Moscow, a religious Jerusalem, a wild Ibiza or a fashionable Milan are trademarks to the city and its residents, their shared culture, their ethos and exclusive identity. Sweet so long as this recognition of distinctiveness is natural, unforced and un-manipulated. What is occurring these days is that a class of politicians and interested parties behind them are ignoring the fact that cultures are now mixed, that traditions change over-night, that a pure gene-pool is a stupid and offensive notion, that borders are receding and that what a nation enjoys in prosperity, wealth, art and culture is a result of centuries of interaction and exchange with nations. To unite the people by means of homogenisation is futile in our globalized world that is moving toward further integration. It is very commendable to have pride on one’s heritage and promote a territory’s a nation’s history, art and culture; but to obsess over employing the before-mentioned in a quest for distinctiveness and creation of a separated identity and self is an act of manipulation.

      John Breuilly once said that: “Nationalist ideology has its roots in intellectual responses to the modern problem of the relationship between state and society”. It is a problem, it does involve a society and the state, and it is an intellectual response.  Elie Kedourie suggests – as many others (as reported by Montserrat Guibernau) that “an elite of intellectuals captures the main  injustices endured by the mass of the population and constructs a nationalist doctrine whose aim is to eliminate the unjust situation shared by  all those belonging to the same nation, thus uniting elites and masses under a single banner”. The objective is to gain power in society and halt their alienation and exclusion from positions of honour and privilege. These intellectuals, perhaps present in modern day Catalonia, understand the delicate economic situation, the distribution of powers nation-wide and the benefits –both in terms of economy and status – they could reap with independence. Thus, masses must galvanize around the quest of independence and must be fed literature on the history, the culture and virtues Catalan’s inherited from their non-Spanish forefathers.

   Adolph Hitler (apologies for quoting him) said that “great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one”. Do fight for independence Mr. Más, but don’t trick people into it.

No More Iraqi Style Wars...Promise

   

The overarching pretext for the 2003 war on Iraq was discovered a sham one year later. In 2004, David Kay, the former UN weapons inspector and Chief of the Iraq Survey Group in Baghdad resigned and announced that he didn’t think former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had possessed any stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons. Former Secretary of State Collin Powell told the Washington Post that he too was having second thoughts about the war based on Kay’s testimony and although he retracted his remarks one day later, the bombshell he dropped caused enough damage. “For many Americans, such candour from inside the intelligence established was both illuminating and devastating. It didn’t matter that the Survey Group had reaffirmed Saddam’s capacity to reconstitute his illicit weapons program, or that he had been developing ballistic missile systems that might deliver new weapons in the future, it didn’t matter that Saddam had killed or scarred tens of thousands of Kurds and Iranians with nerve agents or mustard gas, or that he had been twice discovered developing nuclear weapons….all that mattered in 2004 for many Americans was that they had been colossally misled”(Tyler, 2009: 6-7).

     Now the American political establishment is an intelligent one. It rarely repeats its mistakes and almost always learns from lessons from the past. After the immense amount of money poured out of the American treasury to finance two major wars in the Middle East, the sad number of lives lost in war zones and the counter effect that such wars bore (rising extremism and vindictive jihadism), the Americans are done. No more unnecessary wars, no more blood spilling and no more missionary acts to liberate and democratize the world. Unfortunately, the politics of a superpower cannot follow this logic, and constant and surly intervention in world affairs – in the name of whatever it is – is necessary. A pretext to carry out wars for higher ends than those announced is needed. And the USA managed to find one two days ago.

     The timing of Obama’s speech on the September 11^th thirteenth anniversary was just perfect. In that speech, he outlined the strategy to be followed by the USA and regional actors to eradicate the ISIS and end its acts of terror. His speech also stressed on the need for Middle Eastern countries to assume their share of responsibility and join efforts to fight IS off. And the region’s leaders came through. The foreign ministers of the regional alliance (composed of USA, GCC states, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon and Turkey) against ISIS and other terrorist organizations met in Jeddah yesterday and confirmed its commitment to fight off ISIS, agreeing on who needs to do what. Their efforts will not end at launching a fully-fledged war against ISIS, but will also include actions to stop the flow of foreign fighters into and out of the IS. Most importantly, the Syrian opposition forces will also be trained, supplied with advanced weapons and financed, enjoying a major role in this alliance as it will ensure fighting off ISIS, securing the areas freed from the militants’ grip and prevent the Syrian regime from taking advantage of the strikes against ISIS for its own military and political ends. Considering that the Assad regime may take advantage of the war against ISIS to strike the opposition, the latter will be armed and supported so as it fulfil its mission without wicked intervention from a terrorist-harbouring regime. Both the USA and Saudi Arabia agreed in the meeting on the important role of the Syrian opposition and the need to train it and arm it.

   What a happy coincidence. Just when the world agreed that there can be nothing done to curb the Syrian regime’s tenacious will to remain in power, IS came along. Assad’s swift approval to rid Syria of its chemical weapons' stockpile, his holding of free elections as promised and his deviously intelligent message to the world of the dangers of a fragmented Assad-free Islamist Syria gave reason to the world in general and the American public in particular to oppose further military interventions. Let Syrians deal with their issues and as long as Assad is popular amongst some, well then let him be. However, things quickly changed when IS came to light, beheading Christians, enslaving women and children, abducting western journalists and slitting their throats in cold cold blood, expanding a radical and dangerous state, targeting religious minorities and burning down churches. These barbaric images not only enraged the world, but also scared it. What if this IS does expand? What if its population grows? What if it actually manages to train an army that could attack western interests and western nations? Action must be taken, and money must be spent, and blood must be spilled to stop that. While we are at it, and since it is all part of the same operation and serves the same end, let’s also get rid of Assad via military intervention. Sweet. Olé Obama.