For most of the past 2000 years the Jewish people have existed as a cultural entity, or a nation, without a state. However the atrocities of WW2 changed the ball game for them. In the Jewish mindset not having the apparatus of a state is what led to their wholesale slaughter, and the persecution that preceded it. If we are to look at international relations form a Constructivist angle, we acknowledge that each state has a personality and acts in accordance with this personality. In Israel's case having the apparatus of a state is at the forefront of their consciousness. Every action they take is done in accordance with this mindset. And whilst I am both a liberal and someone highly suspicious of states, I'm also not a fucking idiot and quite aware that for whatever high ideals I might hold, one needs to play with the cards that they are dealt. The State of Israel exists, and there's no fucking way in Hell that the Israelis are ever going to give up its existence. That is your starting point for any solution to the Palestine/Israel conflict. Anyone who does not acknowledge this is not serious about finding a solution.
Which leads me to the flotilla. By trying to break the Gaza blockaid in this manner they were being provocative. There was a highly romanticised sentiment involved in their actions, a real glorious hero fantasy at play. And whatever high moral ground they will take about transporting aid to Gaza, these people were well aware that their actions would be seen as highly antagonistic and inviting reaction by the Israeli Defence Force. I can't help but think this was their actual goal. The 1993 Oslo Accords granted Israeli the ability to inspect cargo entering Gaza by sea. Israeli offered to escort the flotilla to port, inspect the cargo, and the transport it to Gaza. This offer was ignored. This was a further antagonistic move. Whilst I don't condone the actions of the IDF, they never should have boarded the vessels, nor should they have used live ammunition. But the flotilla wanted this sort of overreaction from the IDF. They wanted it so fucking bad. This situation is a wet dream to the anti-Israeli crowd. These are people who I am convinced do not want a solution to the Palestine/Israel situation. They are ideologically driven and their only goal is to make Israel look bad. In this regard the are actually working against the Palestinians. The more irate antagonism Israel receives, the more defensive and aggressive it becomes. Which is not a reaction from Israeli I agree with, but one I know will happen. Israel sees hectoring criticism as just another form of continued Jewish persecution, persecution that post-WW2 they will not allow to occur in any form. Activists such as those on the flotilla refuse to acknowledge this side of Israeli psychology. Their tactics lack any sort of nuance or sophistication at all. They only serve to increase the Israeli stranglehold on the Palestinian Territories. This is something that should be completely obvious to them by now, but unfortunately, for the Palestinians, it isn't.
Friday, June 04, 2010
Friday, March 05, 2010
FIA punctures Serbian hopes.
The FIA's decision not to allow Serbian outfit Stefan GP to race in this year's Formula 1 championship would not just be heartbreaking for Serbian racing fans, but also for the country's EU-enthusiasts as well.
Despite the presence of many skilled Brazilians, the occasional Japanese driver and manufacturer and a lone Australian, Formula 1 is a European dominated sport. All of Formula 1's teams are based in Europe, with only one being owned outside the continent (Force India) and the majority of the races are staged in Europe. Therefore it is no stretch to claim that F1 is a thoroughly European institution. In this regard F1 acts as an arm of EU soft power. It is an important aspect of Europe's influence and its appeal, amongst both the continent's sports fans and its rich and powerful, makes it a relevant component to the EU's eastward expansion.
Formula 1 is a sport of status. A large part of its appeal is due to the glitz and glamour of the sport, those involved give the impression of living the (very) good life. In a similar way, to many former Yugoslav Republics, the EU symbolises a similar representation of the good life. For many young people from the Balkans region, there would be a significant thirst for EU citizenship, for not just the status that comes along with it, but the material benefits as well. Of course, admission to the EU comes with stipulations that not only included financial responsibility, but the embracing of liberal-democratic ideas and the processes of good governance (anti-corruption, human rights etc). Like F1 the EU expects a positive contribution.
This week, the FIA has made the decision that Serbian-owned Stefan GP would not be able to make that positive contribution to the Formula 1 competition for the 2010 season. This is a decision that would have disappointed many within the country. One cannot dismiss the psychological impact sport has on a national consciousness and both the Serbian public and its political elites must be sick of having war crimes tribunals as their only contribution to international news. A Serbian organisation being embraced by such an elite establishment would have provided some positive national pride amongst the Serbian people and thus had a favourable influence on the reform process necessary for Serbia's EU ascendancy. There would have been a sense that this was a step, no matter how small, towards inclusion in Europe's future, a sense that there was some progress being made in Serbia's reconciliation with the continent. Europe does not need a Serbian nation turning back in on itself. Stefan GP's inclusion would have had contributed, in an incremental way, to removing both Serbia, and the Balkans region in general, from its current status as Europe's backwater. With recent history in the region still fresh and wounds still raw, a positive sense of national prestige within an inclusive Europe could have been a significant event in the country's transformation into a good EU partner. This carrot for good governance is the raison d'être of the EU, and whilst the FIA is under no obligation to assist the EU in this matter, it would have been helpful for it to have considered the wider implications of its decision. Let us hope that the spirit of Stefan GP is not crushed by this decision and commits itself to racing in the 2011 season. F1, the EU and especially the Serbian people, can only benefit from their participation.
Despite the presence of many skilled Brazilians, the occasional Japanese driver and manufacturer and a lone Australian, Formula 1 is a European dominated sport. All of Formula 1's teams are based in Europe, with only one being owned outside the continent (Force India) and the majority of the races are staged in Europe. Therefore it is no stretch to claim that F1 is a thoroughly European institution. In this regard F1 acts as an arm of EU soft power. It is an important aspect of Europe's influence and its appeal, amongst both the continent's sports fans and its rich and powerful, makes it a relevant component to the EU's eastward expansion.
Formula 1 is a sport of status. A large part of its appeal is due to the glitz and glamour of the sport, those involved give the impression of living the (very) good life. In a similar way, to many former Yugoslav Republics, the EU symbolises a similar representation of the good life. For many young people from the Balkans region, there would be a significant thirst for EU citizenship, for not just the status that comes along with it, but the material benefits as well. Of course, admission to the EU comes with stipulations that not only included financial responsibility, but the embracing of liberal-democratic ideas and the processes of good governance (anti-corruption, human rights etc). Like F1 the EU expects a positive contribution.
This week, the FIA has made the decision that Serbian-owned Stefan GP would not be able to make that positive contribution to the Formula 1 competition for the 2010 season. This is a decision that would have disappointed many within the country. One cannot dismiss the psychological impact sport has on a national consciousness and both the Serbian public and its political elites must be sick of having war crimes tribunals as their only contribution to international news. A Serbian organisation being embraced by such an elite establishment would have provided some positive national pride amongst the Serbian people and thus had a favourable influence on the reform process necessary for Serbia's EU ascendancy. There would have been a sense that this was a step, no matter how small, towards inclusion in Europe's future, a sense that there was some progress being made in Serbia's reconciliation with the continent. Europe does not need a Serbian nation turning back in on itself. Stefan GP's inclusion would have had contributed, in an incremental way, to removing both Serbia, and the Balkans region in general, from its current status as Europe's backwater. With recent history in the region still fresh and wounds still raw, a positive sense of national prestige within an inclusive Europe could have been a significant event in the country's transformation into a good EU partner. This carrot for good governance is the raison d'être of the EU, and whilst the FIA is under no obligation to assist the EU in this matter, it would have been helpful for it to have considered the wider implications of its decision. Let us hope that the spirit of Stefan GP is not crushed by this decision and commits itself to racing in the 2011 season. F1, the EU and especially the Serbian people, can only benefit from their participation.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
