Livni, at a conference on WHAT??

This is truly a hysterically funny (or tragic) joke. The ruling authorities in Qatar, ever eager to be taken seriously as “intellectual power-houses” in the Gulf region, are holding their 8th annual “Doha Forum on Democracy, Development, and Free Trade.”
And guess who they invited to Doha to speak on these weighty topics? No less an expert than the Foreign Minister of the government that is systematically trying to quash democracy and development in Gaza by the systematic strangling of the Gaza Strip’s free trade.
Do the Qataris have any sense of realism and of the meaning of words?
Or do they merely have a too-highly developed sense of irony? (I doubt that this is the explanation.)
For what it’s worth, Qatar itself is no great exemplar of the ideals and practices of democracy.
And nor is Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni any kind of intellectual power-house.
In her address to the forum she parroted the same, quite contentless and mendacious kind of rhetoric about the struggle in the Middle East being between “moderates” and “extremists” that the US occupation authorities test-drove in Iraq about 18 months ago, to little good effect.
AP’s Barbara Surk reports that,

    Livni told delegates at a democracy and trade conference in Qatar that Israel and Arab states are mired in the same struggle with extremists who “refuse to recognize our democratic rights.”

Quite idiotic. She’s talking to Qataris about “democratic rights”? And that, while her government continues to stamp down on the democratic rights of the Palestinians? How could anyone sit there and listen to her with a straight face?

15 thoughts on “Livni, at a conference on WHAT??”

  1. Helena,
    Do the Qataris have any sense of realism and of the meaning of words?
    Helena, we all know that this funny House of Al-Thani have long demonstrate their irony of behavior in ME and spatially in regards of Arab/Israeli relations.
    They playing and dancing in high wave although they are not been loved by their hoses of sheiks around neither for Saudis.
    But let call this cynical, these guys trying to impress follow what the handler tell them to do not more that and the handler is USA GWB.
    Note: during 33 days war, the family of House of Al-Thani was enjoying their vacations in Israel, they rush and shipped back to disclosed destination when the war started.

  2. The Good the Bad and the Ugly
    “In Doha by Her Highness Sheikha Mozah Bint Nasser Al-Misnad, chairperson of the Qatar Foundation and Consort of the Emir of Qatar, His Highness Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani and by RAND President James A. Thomson.
    This agreement with RAND is the latest of several education and research initiatives launched by the Qatar Foundation. The RAND-Qatar Policy Institute will be a part of the Education City being created in Doha as a regional center of excellence in learning, research and technology development. It will forge ties with medicine, science, engineering and other educational programs opening in Doha, and train the region’s policy analysts in research methods that can help leaders make informed policy decisions.”

  3. I find it quite interesting, Helena, how your selective mind works. Here you are one minute praising the efforts of the “Methuselah-like” Jimmy Carter (because he’s “calm” of all things) to talk to Hamas. Then, in the next, you criticize the fact that Tzipi Livni participates in what is essentially a trade conference in a former enemy (technically, at least) country.
    And what is your main slur against Livni – she’s not an intellectual. Well, you might want to take a look at the list of other attendees there.
    There are quite a few journalists in attendance, as well as a large percentage of the House of Commons, Segolene Royal and even Joseph Kennedy III – so there goes your argument about “intellectual power-houses”!
    Look, Tzipi Livni may not be up to your intellectual standards, but I think that it’s important that and Israeli delegation led by the Foreign Minister is in attendance at a conference on trade hosted by an Arab country.

  4. JES, Helena’s contention, if I read it correctly, is that the aspect of “democracy” is ironic for the conference. You must admit that democracy in Gaza is being penalized by Israel and the United States, and that Qatar doesn’t quite rate as a legitimate democracy.
    It all goes back to whether or not the European (Jewish) invasion and occupation of Palestine was a morally sound action. Was it? And even though it wasn’t, can’t mediation between all the involved parties provide an accommodation for all, as Jimmy Cater has attempted now for decades?

  5. from the CIA World Factbook — Qatar
    **executive elections: none; the monarch is hereditary
    **legislative elections: no legislative elections have been held since 1970 when there were partial elections to the body
    **political parties and leaders: none
    So much for “our democratic rights” being threatened by “extremist” Iran. Quite idiotic.

  6. It all goes back to whether or not the European (Jewish) invasion and occupation of Palestine was a morally sound action. Was it? And even though it wasn’t, can’t mediation between all the involved parties provide an accommodation for all, as Jimmy Cater has attempted now for decades?
    “European invasion”? And what of the non-“Europeans” who have made up a significant portion of the Jewish population since soon after independence?
    Mark, I also love the way you answer your own questions. Was it morally sound? And even though it wasn’t… as if you are the sole arbiter of what is and is not “morally sound”.
    Helena’s contention is just that. If I look at the list of attendees, I notice Syria, Egypt, Algeria and China in attendance. These are hardly exemplars of democracy. But if this is her contention, then it is criticism of Qatar – not Israel or the US (who also sent a large contingency). Further, one could argue that it is not democracy that is being “penalized” in Gaza, rather it is acts of agression on the part of the militias – one of which is under the direct control of the ruling junta.
    And even if her contention were not baseless, then why the ad hominem? Why the hissy fit? Why the personal attack on Ms. Livni’s intellectual prowess?
    Jimmy Carter can do what he likes. However, don’t you find it just a tad hypocritical to actively endorse talks and mediation with Hamas while attacking an obvious example of peaceful coopertation and discussion between two states that formerly had no diplomatic relations?
    BTW, the same might be said for the fawning over one Nobel Lauriate while referring to another as “Methuselah-like” and belittling his – far more significant, in my opinion – contributions to peaceful coexistence.

  7. More evidence that the word ‘democracy’ has been corrupted from a governmental process to a governmental brand: If you’re with us, you’re a democracy. If you’re against us, you’re a terrorist.

  8. Hey JES:
    How do you feel about President Carter’s efforts? I believe he really cares about human suffering, and finding a way forward for two suffering peoples. I read many nasty things said about him at Haaretz-it seems that many Israelis feel ungrateful for his time and attention-yet, President Carter is clearly (and rightfully) disturbed by the terror rockets in Sderot-fully condemning them as war crimes. Why are many Israelis so harsh about President Carter?
    It seems to me that if President Carter is able to end the cycles of violence, which are senseless, than all people gain from his time and efforts-

  9. I have no problem with Livni meeting Arab peninsula leaders. This actually makes a parallel with Carter’s meeting with Mashaal. Dialogue between opposing sides is being encouraged.

  11. Folks should note I wasn’t saying anything in this post about whether Livni should meet with Arab leaders or not. She’s met most of these same people before, at the UN or elsewhere. That’s not my topic here. My topic is having this person, who represents a government that is trying to starve and otherwise de-develop Gaza’s entire population as an attempt to punish them for exercising their democratic rights, as a speaker at a conference on ‘Democracy, Development, and Free Trade.’ So that is a criticism in the first instance of the conference organizers.
    But the arguments she made there were also completely unhinged from bearing any relationship to the facts. (On the other hand, what could she say? There was a truly Alice-in-Wonderlandish quality about the whole encounter. How, in the circs, could she have told her hosts the truth– either about her own government’s policies or about the tragically deficient nature of their ruling system?)
    JohnH, I love the astuteness of your observation has been transformed from a governmental process into a brand. “Moderates” is also a brand du jour, of course. Though in that case the branders have merely elevated a fairly value-neutral term for use as their brand-name, whereas in the case of “Democracy”(TM) they are tragically devaluing, if not eviscerating, a very admirable ideal.

  12. KDJ,
    Personally, I have nothing against Carter traveling to wherever he wants and speaking with whomever is willing. I don’t know what things you’ve read at Ha’aretz – whether you’re talking about people quoted in articles or the talkbacks (which generally don’t have a lot of Israelis).
    I don’t think that people are “ungrateful” for his efforts (which I think is already a kind of patronizing way of characterizing his intentions). I think that they do not appreciate his unilateral attempt at legitimizing a group that still deligitimizes Israel as part of its official position.
    I think that some people are upset about his use of the term “apartheid” and find it insulting. I, myself, have not read his book, but I think that both Carter and his publisher knew that he was using a highly contentious term, and that putting it in the title was bound to draw fire (perhaps that was the intention?). But to react to the criticism with statements about the ethnic composition of university campuses did not help things.
    Personally, I think that Carter was a terrible president. He passed no important legislation and had no major foreign or domestic policy achievements to his credit. In fact, I don’t recall him having a clear or consistent policy at all. And I’m not even taking into account here is very serious, out and out, failures.
    I don’t think that his record as a “statesmen” or peacemaker is much better, if you actually look at it. So, I don’t place much hope in his current “peace mission”.
    I’m sure that Jimmy Carter is a very nice person, and that he genuinely believes that he genuinely cares about all the things you mentioned.

  13. Helena, your topic might have been a little clearer had you stayed away from the gratuitous insults and ad hominem in relation to Ms. Livni.

  14. JES,
    Thank you for your response. What I found interesting was the cool tone-trying to reach out, and well, cool. Oh well. C’est la vie!
    KJD

Comments are closed.