|
« March 2006 |
Main
| May 2006 »
Thought from the day, from Rabindranath Tagore:
A most important truth which we are apt to forget, is that a teacher can never truly teach unless he is still learning himself. A lamp can never light another lamp unless it continues to burn its own flame. The teacher who has come to the end of this subject, who has no living traffic with his knowledge, but merely repeats his lessons to his students, can only load their minds; he cannot quicken them. Truth not only must inform but inspire. If the inspiration dies out, and the information only accumulates, then truth loses its infinity. The greater part of our learning in the schools has been wasted because, for most of our teachers, their subjects are like dead specimens of once living things, with which they have a learned acquaintance, but no communication of life and love.
This comes from Tagore's essay 'An Eastern University', published in 1922 in the Creative Unity collection.
In Tagore's other essays that I flicked through in a borrowed book, I glimpsed ideas on the nation state that predate by decades the debate current in International Relations. I now can't wait until my package arrives from New Delhi. Like all great writers, he is still a man for our times.
 Clinton's comment on the feasibility of censoring the Internet.
But it is possible, as those of us who used the Internet in China know all too well. Hence this special report from The Economist, reproduced below for non-subscribers.
The report is a useful round-up, but unusually short on analysis. Nevertheless, the stats are interesting:
The numbers of internet-connected computers have more than doubled since the end of 2002, to 45.6m, and internet-users have risen by 75%, to 111m. China now has more internet-users than any country but America, and over half of them have broadband (up from 6.6% at the end of 2002). Users of instant computer-to-computer messaging systems have more than doubled, to 87m. Blogs—online personal diaries, scarcely heard of three years ago—now number more than 30m. And search engines receive over 360m requests a day.
The report is correct in remarking that 'the firewall is porous' - that if you have the know-how you can get through it. It also notes the minor successes of bloggers in bringing minor reform; and that Wen Jiabao says that it is worth taking on board the views expressed on the Web.
But the article skirts around what I think is the biggest issue of the Internet in China, something that goes beyond censorship. This is the active complicity of firms such as Yahoo! in informing upon individuals via e-mail and server activity monitoring. These people (there are four known cases) - I will not mention their names, since it will cause any search engine in the PRC to seize up - have a lot to take Yahoo! to issue for.
In my opinion, this is far more serious that Google allowing censorship on Google.cn - it's going to happen anyway. But knocks on the door at two in the morning don't just happen anyway. If we in the West truly do wish to promote change in the PRC, it's Yahoo! we should boycott.
Outside the PRC, you can read what I'm talking about here.
Continue reading "Nailing Jelly to the Wall" »
...can I have some more?
It's becoming increasingly obvious that China's foreign policy is exclusively based around energy. Since leaving Washington, Hu Jintao made a beeline for Saudi Arabia (where he discussed a refining project and a weapons contract) and is now in Nigeria where he just signed another $4bn deal.
Meanwhile, there'll be more anti-terror exercises in Central Asia next year via the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation.
China is clearly cosying up to all its energy supplying allies who, with the US weakened by Iraq, are all looking for reliable customers.
You can't seperate them.
George Monbiot writes an eloquent article on this in Comment is Free. He doesn't really come up with any viable solutions, but his logic in arguing his point is sound.
Firstly, most countries are reliant on other regions - namely the Middle East, the Former Soviet Union and Central Asia - for their oil and gas supplies. There's lots of demand and less and less supply. So there's high competition, and it's a seller's market.
This gives them power over us. Russia, for example, had no qualms about cutting off the Ukraine's gas to make a political point (whether it would have the guts to do this to China, who knows).
So, we have to come up with alternatives. Hydrogen is the best answer at the moment, but currently hydrogen is produced from fossil fuels too and not from electrolysis.
There's the economic issue too:
But a hydrogen network will be viable only if it is cheap. According to a report by the US National Academy of Engineering, the wholesale price of hydrogen made from natural gas with carbon capture will, in "the future", be $1.72 (96p) per kilogramme; from coal, $1.45; and from electrolysis $3.93. In other words, if a hydrogen economy is to be taken seriously, the fuel has to be made from gas or coal, rather than by either wind turbines or nuclear generators.
Now, here is when his argument goes a bit wrong. It's too short term:
So it seems to me that a key environmental challenge, odd as this seems, is to ensure that gas has a future in the UK by making its supplies more secure. I don't mean invading Iran or sucking up to Saparmurat Niyazov. I mean increasing our storage capacity so that we cannot be held to ransom - in the short term at least - either by Gazprom or by the companies that control the flow through the interconnector.
Think long term and put the massive investment into creating realistic alternative energy - sorry, this means nuclear as well as wind farms. This will be economically painful in the short term, but in 2050 we'll be able to sit back and watch the rest of the west collapse.
Assuming China hasn't wiped our economies and the environment out by then already.
Continue reading "Energy Security and the Environment" »
 By Boris Johnson, of all people. The article is the cover story from this week's Spectator, a conservative British journal; it's reproduced also in the Peking Duck and well worth a read.
The longer you spend in the new China, watching the oxyacetylene lamps on the building sites at 3 a.m., the clearer it is that Francis Fukuyama was wrong when, in 1989, he pronounced that the fall of Soviet communism meant the end of history. Systematically, methodically, and with the connivance of their entire political establishment and their growing bourgeoisie, the Chinese are making a mockery of the claim that free-market capitalism and democracy must go hand-in-hand. Which is why, finally, I do not altogether go along with those who have suggested that the next century will belong to China, or that China will somehow rule the planet.
I completely concur. The paragraphs that precede it are also very interesting:
In Shanghai we went to an enormous and lavishly equipped college of journalism, and after we had all swapped business cards (which must be exchanged sacramentally, with both hands and a small kung-fu bow) there was a slide-show of all the distinguished foreigners who had been there, ranging from Ronald Reagan to Margaret Hodge, and then it was my cue to make a small speech of thanks. I explained again that I was an opposition politician, and that I believed it was important to keep up my journalism as a way of getting my message across. This dual role I chose to describe by what I thought was a happy Mao-style aphorism. ‘You could say that I combine the functions of dog and lamp-post!’
As I spoke I could hear the British Council man on my left groan and whisper ‘no, no’, and around the table, on the faces of the tutors of Chinese journalism, there was frank mystification. Later on that evening, when I was trying to explain it to the communist-party girl, it was some time before she grasped what in Western liberal democracies constitutes the proper relationship between the journalist (dog) and the politician (lamp-post), and if you want to understand why my sally fell so thunkingly flat, there is a very simple reason.
In today’s China the dogs are still so respectful of the lamp-posts that the editor of one big paper recently admitted that he gave bonuses to reporters whose work was praised by the Ministry of Information. In many cities the journalists turn up at press conferences and are given little cash-stuffed envelopes to thank them for being there. When I asked the lecturers in journalism to name their professional heroes, they looked utterly bemused, eventually naming Edgar Snow, the American stooge and hagiographer of Mao. At the end of our session at the journalism college a pale, intense academic came up privately and said of course I was right to say that journalism should root out corruption, ‘but we must also care about stability,’ he said, and there is the nub.
Boris's experience reminds me of the fateful day that I took on my second class of journalism students at SHUFE.
The previous year they had been great - inquisitive, enthusiastic and eager to learn, so I had high hopes. I began this time with the same tactic, a discussion on the substance of journalism. "What is the purpose of journalism?" I asked.
"The purpose of journalism is to serve the government," said the hard-faced girl at the back. The class remained silent. She wasn't joking. I had very little success with that group.
So I really feel for Boris. His story is reproduced below, and also on his blog here.
Continue reading "Why China Won't Become Democratic" »
 Isabel Hilton comments on the Nepal crisis in The Guardian, lamenting that the EU and the US have been ineffective in helping to solve the crisis. She argues:
There is one way out of Nepal's crisis: the king must go and a full democracy that includes the Maoists must be established.
She is being naive. The only thing worse for Nepal than the continuation of Gyanendra's despotic rule would be a complete takeover by the Maoists. Revolutionary guerrillas are not interested in contributing to government via the ballot box - they want to rule by the gun. They would not be satisfied with the solution she proposes, far from it.
I dread to imagine what would happen in Nepal were they to seize total control; whatever their public face, I'm sure that they have violent plans for certain sections of the community. And it would be the bitter end of Nepal's lucrative tourist industry, one of the few things that has kept it going in the past.
It would also be bad news for India, which is also facing Maoist insurgency in certain states (despite Maoist political parties having legitimacy via elections, there are still those who bear arms). A collapse in Nepal would give them succour and would probably mean an extension of their weapon supply routes, a new Ho Chi Minh trail, perhaps.
What Nepal needs is a) for the King to fully hand over the reins and become a symbolic constitutional monarch like our own Queen b) for the government to be enabled to fight off the guerrillas, which may mean foreign support but NOT intervention c) for the government to break the cycle of corruption and actually invest in the impoverished countryside that gave rise to the Maoist movement in the first place.
Full article reproduced below.
Continue reading "Maoists Don't Vote" »
 Another Bin Laden tape surfaced today, and the BBC offers a translation. Yes, OK, I'm guilty of it myself, but it's amazing how much interest the old duffer can still provoke, even three-and-a-half years after 9/11.
Osama Bin Laden is no longer a relevant figure. Whatever 'al-Qaeda' actually is, and whether or not he is still the nominal head of it, international Islamic terrorism has transcended his influence. Terrorists act more or less alone these days. They attack independently and with minimal supervision from the FBI's most-wanted. But for the need for finance and supplies, they would be outside the jurisdiction of all but the most local of groups.
And there have been few significant attacks since Madrid. Of course I wouldn't be saying this were I in Baghdad, but killing other Muslims isn't part of the strategy, I reckon.
Parts of Bin Laden's speech itself are notable for their twisting of logic, but that's propaganda for you. On Sudan:
One of the areas of gravest strife was western Sudan, where some differences among the tribesmen were used to trigger a ferocious war among them that consumes everything in its way, in preparation for sending Crusader forces to occupy the region and steal its oil under the cover of maintaining security there. It is a continuous Zionist-Crusader war against the Muslims.
Wrong. In fact Chinese and Malaysian companies hold the majority of the equity in Sudan's oil production.
The next paragraph also makes me wonder:
...you smile in our faces, saying: We are not hostile to Islam; we are hostile to terrorists, and we advocate peaceful coexistence and dialogue rather than a clash of civilizations. The reality belies their pronouncements, for the Western diplomats only seek dialogue for the sake of dialogue. They aim to deceive and anaesthetise us in order to buy time. They only want us to observe a truce.
Well done Osama for flicking through Huntingdon's book (I wonder if The Clash of Civilizations is available in Arabic?), but despite appearances the West is not really bent on destroying Islam. It would be more than happy to co-exist with Muslims, so long as it can buy their oil under favourable terms. That's the real point.
Go back to your cave, Osama (though I suspect that you're actually hiding in Pervez Musharraf's spare room) and leave us in peace. Leave the jihad to those who are actually out there fighting.
Update: Even Hamas and the Sudanese government don't want to know about this.
There again, there's always going to be someone who buys this stuff and goes out and acts upon it...
 Or is it too early to tell?
Firstly Nepal. The despotic King Gyanendra appears to have performed a U-turn, and is now saying that he will return power to the people. But there are many who are still dissatisfied. The unrest of the last fortnight continued - fortunately there hasn't been another Tiananmen or Andijan, but tomorrow is another day.
Gyanendra may say things like "the source of sovereign authority is inherent in the people", but how far is he prepared to go? And what do the people really want? The Maoist insurgency in Nepal is in some ways a reaction to the institutions of government and monarchy, and things may well get worse before they get better.
I visited Nepal in 2004, and happened to arrive there on the day of a prime ministerial resignation. There were troops on the street, but it seemed to be business as usual in Kathmandu. Things have changed since then, and I'd like to see Nepal return to normality. Strange how countries I come to like - Zimbabwe was another - fall into chaos just after I leave.
Nepal needs the tourism business, frankly: and it doesn't need to become a geopolitical pawn in the heart of Asia. The king has acted in the country's best interests, but he had better be sure that the country will act in his - lest he find himself with his head on a stick.
Meanwhile, Iraq has a new Prime Minister, Jawad al-Maliki. Not a name that we have heard a lot over the last couple of years. He does, however, recognize the ambivalence of the US's policy of divide and rule - you can't dismiss and rebuild the conventional army and state and rely on local militias and mullahs to keep order for you at the same time:
In his first policy speech after being asked to form a government, Mr Maliki said Iraq's militia groups must merge with the country's security forces, the Reuters news agency reported.
"Arms should be in the hands of the government. There is a law that calls for the merging of militias with the armed forces," Mr Maliki was quoted as saying.
Time will tell. I, for one, am glad I'm not in either of these gentlemen's shoes.
 An entertaining little story for those of us familar with the soon-to-be-closed Xiang Yang Market.
In a nutshell, Louis Vuitton successfully sued Carrefor for flogging fake handbags in China. However, how this is going to stop the "DVD? Watch? Bag?" crew I don't know.
A couple of interesting quotes:
The clandestine nature of counterfeiting means it is difficult to assess its impact. One American government estimate suggested that American, European and Japanese companies lost out on trade worth some $60 billion because of Chinese counterfeiting in 2003. The European Union suggests that half of the 100m fake items seized there in 2004 came from China. The FBI puts America’s total losses resulting from all illegally copied goods at around $250 billion a year.
And a very realistic conclusion:
As this week’s court case suggests, China is tightening up its laws and applying them more forcefully than before, though penalties remain low. Yet the total impact of its efforts against counterfeiters is negligible. China wants to be seen to act on the problem, but will do nothing to slow the economy’s rapid growth that creates much-needed jobs. No politician is keen to closing counterfeiting plants that are big employers in some towns and cities...
When legitimate Chinese companies are producing the world’s favourite handbags, then laws will be more strictly enforced to protect them...
Indeed.
Full story from Economist Global Agenda below.
Continue reading "Handbags at Dawn" »
 So far so good during this crucial visit. Not a state visit, but weighty nonetheless.
Hu Jintao has shown himself to be more in touch with the Western media than I had previously thought. He dines with Bill Gates and donned a baseball cap at Boeing - for the cameras.
But there is bound to be hard-talking somewhere in Washington, even if it's not between Bush and Hu. Frankly I doubt that Bush has the strength of character and cultural intelligence, let alone the political capital, to get any major concessions from the PRC on the Yuan's exchange rate - and that, let's face it, is what this is all about.
Bush should at least know not to grab the man's jacket in public, for God's sake. Talk about loss of face.
BBC Analysis below.
Continue reading "Hu's in Town" »
 When I was at journalism college, we were always told to write about what has happened, never about what has not happened.
Then again, we were also told 'break any rule if you have to', and today's non-news from Israel is a case in point.
The only way for the Palestine situation ever to be solved is for one side to step back and hold off. Hopefully, the new government in Israel will make this their policy. Fiery rhetoric aside, the ball is now firmly in Hamas's court.
Once the bombers (whether from Hamas, Islamic Jihad or the al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigade is irrelevant, though it seems the recent attack was an Islamic Jihad act) see that their terror tactics are having no effect at all - no concessions, no compromises, no talks, not even any reprisals - they will have no choice but to change their strategy. Of course this may lead to even more extreme and atrocious moves, but I doubt it.
Israel have Hamas over a barrel - they can starve them out, and they know it. Now that Hamas have the political legitimacy and the mandate of the Palestinian people, they absolutely have to act in the people's best interests, and that means looking after their day-to-day needs rather than pursuing the pipe dream of the end of Israel.
Both sides can win the day if they can restrain themselves. It's not much, and I don't expect an immediate breakthrough, but it's the best news out of the Middle East for a long time.
Guardian story below. See also The Economist Global Agenda.
Continue reading "When Inaction is the Best Action" »
At last. Proof that I'm not a total waste of space.
For too long I've beaten myself up about being so behind my peers in everything, a low earner, a student at 31. Well, go read this. Proof that even a 'Nobel Laureate' and former chief economist at the World Bank can be so off the track he's almost running backwards.
Anyway, who is this Stiglitz guy? I looked him up - he has a 54-page CV, no less - and doctorates from about a hundred places. He won a Nobel and was once a chief figure in the World Bank.
How is it possible for him to write such crap about China? It's quite mindblowing. It's one thing never having been there (even if he has, he clearly hasn't been outside his hotel room or a swanky conference in Beijing) - it's another thing overlooking so many details on the PRC.
Breathtaking. It's a good reason never to trust the World Bank.
 Talk of the day has to be Seymour Hersh's article in The New Yorker. The whole text is reprinted below, and here's a couple of the best moments:
One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that the military planning was premised on a belief that “a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.” He added, “I was shocked when I heard it, and asked myself, ‘What are they smoking?’ ”...
The lack of reliable intelligence leaves military planners, given the goal of totally destroying the sites, little choice but to consider the use of tactical nuclear weapons. “Every other option, in the view of the nuclear weaponeers, would leave a gap,” the former senior intelligence official said. “ ‘Decisive’ is the key word of the Air Force’s planning. It’s a tough decision. But we made it in Japan.” ...
Under Ahmadinejad, the Revolutionary Guards have expanded their power base throughout the Iranian bureaucracy; by the end of January, they had replaced thousands of civil servants with their own members. One former senior United Nations official, who has extensive experience with Iran, depicted the turnover as “a white coup,” with ominous implications for the West. “Professionals in the Foreign Ministry are out; others are waiting to be kicked out,” he said. “We may be too late. These guys now believe that they are stronger than ever since the revolution.” He said that, particularly in consideration of China’s emergence as a superpower, Iran’s attitude was “To hell with the West. You can do as much as you like.” ...
“If you attack,” the high-ranking diplomat told me in Vienna, “Ahmadinejad will be the new Saddam Hussein of the Arab world, but with more credibility and more power. You must bite the bullet and sit down with the Iranians.”
The diplomat went on, “There are people in Washington who would be unhappy if we found a solution. They are still banking on isolation and regime change. This is wishful thinking.” He added, “The window of opportunity is now.”
Now, I still find it incredibly hard to believe that after the Iraq debacle, the US is seriously going to attack Iran. It has to be a bluff, right? OK, so Clinton struck Iraq a couple of times during the 1990s too, but actical nukes? And would a hit on Iran be followed by a ground invasion? It doesn't bear thinking about.
Well, Seymour Hersh is a pretty senior journalist. He's ëffectively staking his reputation on this, so there must be something in it.
Continue reading "The Iran Plan" »
 It's really starting to feel like the summer of '69, not that I have any nostalgic feelings for Woodstock nor was even born then. I'm taking about the music with a political message. In stark contrast to the Right Brothers (assuming they weren't ironic) now comes this protest song from Nerina Pallot.
With lyrics like this:
If love is a drug, i guess we're all sober
If hope is a song, i guess it's all over
How to have faith when faith is a crime?
I don't want to die
If God's on our side, then God is a joker
Asleep on the job, his children fall over
Running out through the door and straight to the sky
I don't want to die...
...who needs Joni Mitchell? However - and I do know it's a protest song - I think the chances of Nerina Pallet getting shot in her safe cozy living room in Jersey is highly unlikely, no matter how much it might worry her. Unless she goes on tour in Baghdad, which I can't see either.
More lyrics below...
Continue reading "Battle of the Bands" »
 Where does Britain stand - by the US or beside the EU? An answer to that today in the sale of BAE Systems' share of Airbus.
This is big business - big, big, big business. And the fact that BAE has sold in order to concentrate on the US defence market indicates a trend towards a general European pullout. Airbus is a flagship company if ever there was one.
As far as I know, BAE Systems no longer has any stakes in EADS, the pan-European company that will now fully own Airbus. With the French protesting against economic systems that might actually help them compete in the globalized economy, no wonder the Brits are getting cold feet. Having bought United Defence last year, BAE Systems now has its sights firmly set on the US.
But what does it mean for the EU? After last year's failed presidency, now that the glue of heavy industry has dried out it seems that the UK is drifting further and further away.
Continue reading "Bye Bye BAE-bus" »
 Instapundit via Comment is Free gives us The Right Brothers.
OK, I'm not sure about the first verse (the whole lot is reprinted below) but surely this is meant to be ironic? Or is my sense of humour too sophisticated to handle this? Does not compute...
Click here to play the song... Some of their lyrics are as follows:
Democracy is on the way, hitting like a tidal wave
All over the middle east, dictators walk with shaky knees
Don’t know what they’re gonna do,
their worst nightmare is coming true
They fear the domino effect, they’re all wondering who’s next
The line "Cindy Sheehan - wrooooong!" gets me especially. As if the mother of a dead soldier is a legitimate subject for attack in a political rock song. It convinces me all the more that this is an incredibly subtle spoof. What do you reckon?
Continue reading "Surely Ironic? Surely?" »
There's a Brazilian restaurant in Shanghai, just next to Jing An Si metro. If you get the chance to go there, do. It's fantastic. Prices have probably gone up since I left, but in July it was 75RMB (under $10) for as much meat you can eat. The ultimate in capitalist consumption.
So it was interesting to see how Brazil is getting along with China these days
I see it as further evidence that we're in the throes of a new Cold War. China's influence abroad continues to mount, much to the consternation of the US. But what exactly is the Chinese model of 'peaceful development'? Here's one version:
"The Chinese government has achieved the greatest victory in the history of human rights," says Charles Tang, who heads the Brazil-China Chamber of Commerce and who has been behind many of the joint-venture initiatives.
"It has removed 400 million Chinese people from poverty and enabled them to live with dignity and take part in economic life. That is the true measure of human rights."
This is true. However, Brazil and others would do well to remember the other aspect of China's growth. It's occuring not despite China's lack of democracy but because of it. Do they really want to emulate everything about the system? Or is development simply equatable to freedom regardless of the consequences.
Continue reading "Brazil Seeks Different Kind of Model" »
 An interesting article by the admirable Max Hastings on Comment is Free.
I think two things have been lacking in the Bush / Blair Iraq policy. The first is honesty. Rather than spinning out the rhetoric on WMD, building upon zavaell's letter reproduced in the comments, our political leaders should should have said this:
"Iraq has the second largest known oil reserves in the world, and is bang in the middle of an unstable, strategically vital and oil-rich region.
"We are sorry, but as you all know the economies of the West are totally dependent on oil. If someone like Saddam gets his hands on WMD in the future, or gets away with anything funny like he did in 1991, we're stuffed.
"So we'd really better take him out while we have the chance. Unfortunately blood does have to be spilt for oil and we should have done it 12 years ago, really."
Not pretty, but at least it's honest. I think that voters may have appreciated this message more than than the one we actually got.
The second failure is in historical, political and strategic awareness, and it makes me wonder what the point of the US Army War College and other institutions is unless politicians listen to them.
I wasn't around around during the Vietnam war but I've read some books on it. That's been enough to teach me a few things about what can go wrong in a foreign war. I'm not saying I'm an expert but it seemed pretty obvious that the more the US forces alienated the local population then the stronger their enemies became.
It's not rocket science. Isn't there a library at the White House? Doesn't it contain some of these books and journals, A Bright Shining Lie for example? A lot of lives could have been saved had Bush and his people had simply studied history a bit harder and learnt from previous mistakes.
It never stops! And there's no regime too unsavoury for China to buy energy from: Iran, Sudan, now - Turkmenistan. The pace of the deals this year has been fast and furious - or maybe I never noticed them before.
Few details, but read the BBC and Bloomberg reports below.
Continue reading "More PRC Pipeline Diplomacy" »
 Or is it?
The Sunday Telegraph today boasts this exclusive on 'secret' talks to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. The authorities of course deny it.
Whether it's true or not, it does raise legitimate questions. It's clearly current policy - the 'Bush Doctrine', some call it - to pre-emptively strike countries you suspect to be developing WMD. Even Clinton did it back in the 1990s, so it's not just a neocon thing.
So what to do about Iran? Negotiation isn't going to work - unless, of course, there's a clear threat of force behind it. Perhaps the deliberate spreading of rumours (note how this follows very swiftly from Condi's visit to the UK) is a tool to nudge Ahmedinejad back to the table.
However, the consequences of actual attack on Iran would obviously be dire. It would justify what Islamists would call a defensive jihad. Iran would be able to retailiate against the US and UK on not one but two fronts - Iraq and Afghanistan - possibly in the shape not of MBTs and fighter planes but the far more troublesome supply of weapons and the insertion of guerrilla support for anti-Western factions.
It may be that Iran is already doing so, and hence an extra impetus for the threats.
On the other hand, Iran's impudence is a clear threat to US influence in the region. If Iran were to successfully develop a nuclear weapon, it would become a regional hegemon and thus would be in a far better position to negotiate on topics such as Israel, oil and pipeline routes.
Who'll blink first? If I were Ahmedinajad, I'd stand my ground, knowing that I'm already in more favour with my own voting public than either Bush or Blair - and, moreover, that any infraction on Iranian territory is going to enhance my support while it will inevitably weaken and even topple my enemies.
Your call, Condi.
Continue reading "April Fool, Iran" »
|
|
