A Detroit immigration judge ordered 88 year old retired auto engineer John Klayman deported. Four years ago he was stripped of his citizenship after admitting that he killed a Jew while serving with German security forces in Russia in 1942. He later denied it.
I would not be surprised if Klayman did kill a Jew. I am sure he killed many people and committed numerous crimes during WWII. German security forces in Russia were particularly savage. Many villages were burned to the ground and their inhabitants killed, sent to camps, or left to starve. The Germans even shot dogs in their kennels. But Klayman is not being deported for committing an atrocity or participating in a massacre. He is being deported for killing a man in the middle of a world war nearly 70 years ago on a day when thousands of men were killed. If he had admitted to killing a Gypsy or a Pole on that fateful day in 1942 he might have gotten away with it. But he didn't, and now he is being deported.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Monday, January 31, 2011
Whose Egypt?
Things are not going particularly well for the U.S. in the Middle East. The "democratic" governments the U.S. has striven to create in Iraq and Afghanistan are fragile and rely heavily on the U.S. Without continued American support and financial aide the odds of those governments lasting a year would be slim. Over ten years after the U.S. toppled the regimes in Iraq and Afghanistan order in those countries is precarious. Iran remains a growing threat in the region and perhaps beyond. Talks between Israel and the Palestinians are proving resistant to U.S. efforts to move them along. Now, our single most important Arab partner in the Middle East is in turmoil. Over a half century of U.S. involvement in the region and billions of dollars have not yet produced the Middle East we have hoped for.
For decades the U.S. has striven to produce a stable Middle East. We thought we had learned a lesson from the Iranian Revolution. The lesson we thought we had learned was that support for autocratic regimes was counter productive, even dangerous. We thought that if we could bring democracy and economic progress we could create a stable, and perhaps even friendly, Middle East. If nothing else we could finally take the region off the front page. The results of our efforts are not very good. Despite the history of our attempts we have yet to learn that as difficult as it is to create a democracy where there is no tradition of one, it is even more difficult to maintain one. In the absence of a democratic people, a democratic government is a fleeting and dangerous thing.
One of the few bright spots in the Middle East has been Egypt. Over the years Egypt has changed from a Soviet client and a near implacable enemy into a moderate and reliable partner, albeit a not very democratic one. Egypt made peace with Israel. It has worked with the U.S. on issues in the region. It has cooperated with Israel in restraining Hamas. We have come to rely on Egypt as a stabilizing force in the region. All that is now in jeopardy.
We invaded Iraq and sought to create a democracy. We invaded Afghanistan and sought to create a democracy. We assumed the people in Afghanistan and Iraq wanted democracy, but we didn't really ask them. We have wanted a democracy in Egypt for a long time. We have come close but our reach has continually exceeded our grasp. We know what kind of Egypt we want. We will have to wait to see what kind of Egypt the Egyptians want. Egypt is not ours. It belongs to the Egyptians. Little good will come out of U.S. interference. No good will come out of Israeli interference.
Throwing our lot in with an unpopular regime rarely ends well. The U.S. should learn from its past mistakes and let the Egyptians sort things out. We may not wind up with the Egypt we want, but we should do what we can do to have an Egypt we can live with. At the moment, there are few good options for the U.S. If we support the government and it endures we risk tainting it and feeding the ire of anti-western elements. If we support the government and it collapses we undermine our influence in the region and would likely garner the animosity of the new leadership. If we do nothing we will only make western leaning governments in the region more timid.
It is possible there is going to be a new Egypt once the dust settles. It would be best for the U.S. to stick to platitudes and cautions for the time being. If democracy triumphs, the U.S. should hold off celebrating. In the U.S., people see democracy as an end. For a large part of the rest of the world however, democracy is a means to an end. There are many people who embrace democracy not out of principle, but because they see it as a vehicle for their ambitions.
For decades the U.S. has striven to produce a stable Middle East. We thought we had learned a lesson from the Iranian Revolution. The lesson we thought we had learned was that support for autocratic regimes was counter productive, even dangerous. We thought that if we could bring democracy and economic progress we could create a stable, and perhaps even friendly, Middle East. If nothing else we could finally take the region off the front page. The results of our efforts are not very good. Despite the history of our attempts we have yet to learn that as difficult as it is to create a democracy where there is no tradition of one, it is even more difficult to maintain one. In the absence of a democratic people, a democratic government is a fleeting and dangerous thing.
One of the few bright spots in the Middle East has been Egypt. Over the years Egypt has changed from a Soviet client and a near implacable enemy into a moderate and reliable partner, albeit a not very democratic one. Egypt made peace with Israel. It has worked with the U.S. on issues in the region. It has cooperated with Israel in restraining Hamas. We have come to rely on Egypt as a stabilizing force in the region. All that is now in jeopardy.
We invaded Iraq and sought to create a democracy. We invaded Afghanistan and sought to create a democracy. We assumed the people in Afghanistan and Iraq wanted democracy, but we didn't really ask them. We have wanted a democracy in Egypt for a long time. We have come close but our reach has continually exceeded our grasp. We know what kind of Egypt we want. We will have to wait to see what kind of Egypt the Egyptians want. Egypt is not ours. It belongs to the Egyptians. Little good will come out of U.S. interference. No good will come out of Israeli interference.
Throwing our lot in with an unpopular regime rarely ends well. The U.S. should learn from its past mistakes and let the Egyptians sort things out. We may not wind up with the Egypt we want, but we should do what we can do to have an Egypt we can live with. At the moment, there are few good options for the U.S. If we support the government and it endures we risk tainting it and feeding the ire of anti-western elements. If we support the government and it collapses we undermine our influence in the region and would likely garner the animosity of the new leadership. If we do nothing we will only make western leaning governments in the region more timid.
It is possible there is going to be a new Egypt once the dust settles. It would be best for the U.S. to stick to platitudes and cautions for the time being. If democracy triumphs, the U.S. should hold off celebrating. In the U.S., people see democracy as an end. For a large part of the rest of the world however, democracy is a means to an end. There are many people who embrace democracy not out of principle, but because they see it as a vehicle for their ambitions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)