Anne with an E

Several weeks ago I complained that the biggest winners of this year’s Emmy awards were series I had stopped watching after a few episodes because there were virtually no characters in them to like and the real world already has enough bad apples. In response to my complaint my former IMF colleague, Marta Castello Branco, who had been a member of the IMF technical assistance missions that I led to the central banks of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan in 1992-3, recommended that I watch “Anne with an E.”  Boy was she right.

In three seasons with ten episodes each, “Anne with an E” follows the adventures of a brilliant, well-read but socially inept orphan girl adopted at the age of 13 by a relatively old brother and sister who had never married. The drama takes place in Canada around 1800. Anne is super smart and used her expansive imagination and extensive reading of the classics to survive the cruelties of 12 years in an orphanage before her adoption. She talks faster than a speeding bullet and is rarely quiet. The series is essentially about the coming of age experiences of children in a small farming community as seen largely through Anne’s eyes.

Being a homely red head, Anne’s growing up challenges are more than most, which can be difficult enough for the average child.  The series frankly and honestly treats the racial biases toward blacks, native Indians, gays, and other minorities at the time, the ugliness of school bullies, and the ridged moral codes of the towns people. But through the ups and downs of life most members of the farming community learn and grow in their understanding of their fellow community members.  Anne plays a large role in the struggle to make the world a better place while trying to understand her own place in it. There are plenty of people to like. The show is excellently cast and performed and gripping and uplifting. I can’t recommend it highly enough. Thank you Marta.

Trump’s second go

JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon recently stated that:  “I don’t think people are voting for Trump because of his family values. If you just take a step back and are honest, he’s kind of right about NATO, kind of right on immigration, he grew the economy quite well, tax reform worked. He was right about some of China….  I don’t like how Trump said things, but he wasn’t wrong about those critical issues. That’s why they’re voting for him. People should be more respectful of our fellow citizens. When you guys have people up here [on a CNBC panel] you always ask them why — not like it’s a binary thing that you’re supporting Trump or you’re not supporting him– but why are you supporting him.” “Jamie Dimon on Trump

In addition, during Trump’s administration many excessive regulations were revoked or reduced. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos promoted school choice and restore due process to college rape cases. Andrew Wheeler, Trump’s administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reduced greenhouse gas emissions, improved water quality, and cleaned up contaminated sites while strengthening cost benefit assessments of environmental regulations. And much more.

His administration did many bad things as well.  His advisors Stephen Miller and Peter Navarro implemented protectionist, buy American trade policies that hurt our economy. His crazy withdrawal from the Trans Pacific Partnership was an ill advised gift to China. He Imposed a travel ban on citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries, rescinded the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Program, separated families at the US-Mexico border and withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement and the Iran Deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), which was designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Trump’s promise to leave Afghanistan was not kept (and was later very badly executed by President Biden). His initial love affairs with North Korea’s President Kim Jong Un and China’s Xi Jinping exploded into hostility. If reelected Trump promises revenge against his enemies. He promises to strip tens of thousands of career employees of their civil service protections in order to dismantle the “deep state.” He promises to impose tariffs on all imported good and to revoke the visas of students studying in the U.S. who are critical of the U.S. None of these is keeping with the traditions and policies that have helped make America great.

On the other hand, I hope that he would keep his promise not to send American soldiers to Taiwan should China attack it militarily, which would be insane. Whether we would get the better or worse policies under another Trump administration would also depend on the team that he would bring with him.

Trump’s small-minded pettiness, dishonesty, vindictiveness, and egotism are on daily display. He is not someone I would invite into my home. But we are right to look at the policies he pledges and is likely to pursue if elected President again in 2024. As with his previous administration, his next one, if reelected, will depend on those who join and run his administration.

My expectation is that Trump will be more careful next time to choose loyalists rather than the most capable. It is also likely that the most capable people would refuse to be part of another Trump administration. I expect the worst.

The Houthi’s and Us

After almost a decade of trying to end Saudi Arabian bombing of the Houthi government in Northern Yemen, President Biden has ordered multiple American bombing attacks on Northern Yemen because of Houthi attacks on ships sending arms to Israel in support of its genocide in Gaza. You might need to read that sentence again to get all its parts.

The first point is that once again the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that the Congress must authorize war before the President can launch one, has been violated. And why did Biden think it necessary to bomb Yemen? Because the Houthi attacks were interfering with our shipment of weapons to Israel in support of Israel’s vicious murder of Palestinians by bombing and starvation. “The group’s official spokesman reiterated that attacks on vessels transiting the Bab el-Mandeb Strait toward the Suez Canal will continue until “Gaza [receives] the food and medicine it needs.” That shouldn’t be hard to accomplish.

Even if the US Congress authorized the American bombing of Yemen, it would be bad policy for the U.S., for the Palestinians, and for Israel. “Weighing additional US responses to Houthi Red Sea attacks” America’s interest should be peace and prosperity for all in the Middle East (and all the world). Supporting Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza does not serve that goal and makes the U.S. complicit in Israel’s genocide. Moreover, Europe’s relative silence and the silence of any of us to Israel’s inhuman war in Gaza (including Biden, Trump and Nikki Haley) makes them all complicit. “War in Gaza exposes European philosophy ethically bankrupt”

The march toward the aridification of Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank is too unbelievably savage to spell out. Such a fate should not be wished on any people. “Unfolding genocide as ever single person in Gaza goes hungry” “Israel’s Netanyahu its Cromwell”

But this war, following a century of Zionist mistreatment of Palestinians in their homeland, is destroying Israel. “Israel is facing existential threats from inside and out-there’s one solution” Israel is committing suicide. To survive, Israel must become a secular democratic state that give equal rights and fair treatment to all who inhabit it. “One state solution for Palestine/Israel”

U.S. leadership is failing once again and is waning. The lust for war by the hawks has overpowered American self-interest once again. War with Iran can’t be far behind. Taiwan can wait (a bit).  “Gaza and Yemen sound death knell for US led rules based global order”

One State Solution for Palestine/Israel

I have long supported the “two state solution” for the Levant envisioned by the Oslo Accords. I led IMF technical assistance teams that launched the Palestine Monetary Authority as called for in the Oslo Accords. “Oslo-the Play”   After listening to the following presentation by two very knowledgeable Jews, I have changed my mind: Max Blumenthal & Miko Peled 

In supporting a Two State Solution I had assumed that the alternative One State Solution had to be a democratic Jewish state as sought by Zionists, which would have required that Israel eliminate, one way or another, enough Palestinians to establish and retain a large Jewish majority. This is, of course, exactly the policy Israel had followed since its founding and most conspicuously in its current devastating attack on Palestinians in Gaza.  “A one state solution”

Miko Peled, the son of a distinguished Israeli general, proposes a One State Solution in which Israel’s Jews give up its being a Jewish State. Rather Israel, from the River to the Sea, would be a democratic state in which all residence would enjoy equal treatment under the law. But can Zionists be convinced to support a secular Israel of Jews and Palestinian, both the descendance of Abraham. In a recent meeting of the Committee for the Republic, Rabbi Yaakov Shapiroargued that Zionism is antisemitic and should be repudiated:  “Antizionism is not Antisemitic”

In a realistic assessment of the current situation, Natan Sachs argues that neither a one state nor two state solution is possible any time soon because of the lack of trust on both sides after 70 years of oppressive Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands and the vicious attack on Israel by Hamas on Oct 7. However, he argues that continuing to kick the can down the road has been a disaster and must end. The U.S., now providing the bombs with which Israel is slaughtering innocent Palestinian men, women, and children, must order an immediate ceasefire before millions in Gaza starve to death and the war escalates to Lebanon and beyond.  “UN Human Rights Experts warm of unfolding Genocide in Gaza”

The U.S. must also use it considerable leverage to end new Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Settler (and Israeli Army) abuse of Palestinians living there and strengthen the Palestinian Authority. Since WWII the U.S. has given Israel more than $260 billion in foreign assistance (over $3.3 billion annually in recent years), more than to any other country.

“It is time, rather, to couple a political horizon with serious, transformative, solution-oriented yet hard-nosed conflict management: imperfect, messy, halting, unsatisfactory for all, and yet preferable by far to the current reality…. The United States must set the ground rules for the long interim period before true conflict resolution might be possible and enforce these rules vigorously…. Even if a solution to the conflict is currently unavailable, aimlessly kicking the can down the road is not a reasonable strategy. That approach was not conflict management; it was a strategy that allowed the conflict to manage both sides.”  “Peace between Israelis and Palestinian remains possible”

In my view a single state with full citizenship with equal rights for all inhabitance would be the best long run outcome but it will not be easy and will take time for interim Israeli occupation to build mutual confidence for drafting and adopting such a constitution (like England, Israel does not have a written constitution). Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and other parts of greater Israel housing important Jewish, Islamic and Christian sites must be fully protected by religious liberty provisions of the constitution.  While such an outcome will take many years to achieve, interim measures must build to that outcome.

From the River to the Sea

I oppose the death penalty, but on occasion have said (and perhaps written) that I am tempted to relax my opposition for those who deliberately spread lies (or bomb babies). This is my cherished right in the U.S. where we enjoy (still to some extent) our freedom to say whatever we want. I strongly oppose antisemitic statements as well as false claims that condemning acts of the Israeli government is antisemitic. But I defend the right of people to says such things (but would never invite them to my home). It is also my right to condemn their rudeness.

The demonstrations of Jewish (Israeli) and Arab (Palestinian) students condemning Hamas’ Oct 7 attack on Israel and Israel’s subsequent attack on Gaza (and increased violence against Palestinians in the West Bank) are understandably intense. To be clear, violence from demonstrators toward anyone (such as blocking access to class) is not protected by our First Amendment right to free speech and would be certainly condemned by me. But shouting death to the Palestinians or to the Jews without actual threats of violence is protected. The First Amendment is not needed to protect speech we agree with or like but speech we disagree with and/or are offended by. The benefits of such freedom in our society are huge but seem to need renewed support.

I am particularly annoyed by deliberate distortions of the meaning of chants like “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” I share that aspiration. Indeed, everyone from the river to the sea should be free. Representative Rashida Tlaib, Democrat of Michigan, was censured by House lawmakers for saying it.

Unfortunately, disapproval and disagreement have morphed into inappropriate sanctions:

“The brother of a British-Israeli man who had been killed during Hamas’ attack on 7 October… told the BBC that he found the marches in the UK for Gaza upsetting and intimidating. Chants like ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’ were, he observed, evidence of deep-rooted and growing antisemitism in British society.

“The problem is not just that many British Jews assume the UK has an antisemitism problem based on a highly dubious interpretation of the chant’s meaning. It is that establishment media organisations are echoing that misunderstanding and treating it as more newsworthy than Israel killing Palestinian babies, with the UK government’s blessing. It is just one illustration of a pattern of reporting by western media outlets skewing their news priorities in ways that reveal a racist hierarchy of concern. Jewish fears are of greater import than actual Palestinian deaths, even babies’ deaths. 

“The hypocrisy is especially hard to stomach, given a central Israeli justification for its subsequent genocidal rampage through Gaza. Israel promoted the claim that Hamas had beheaded 40 Israeli babies on 7 October – a story that was widely reported as fact, even though no evidence was ever produced for it.”  “Israel-Palestine war: Gaza slogan bigger news than murder of babies”

New York Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik’s attack on the President of MIT, Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania for defending free (if repugnant) speech was particularly disgusting and alarming. The President of the U of Penn, Liz Magill, was evening forced to resign. While there may be some grey areas between shouting that all Arabs or all Jews (or Trumpeters) should die and actually threatening their lives, the attacks we have been seeing on the freedom to say nasty things is dangerous to a valued American institution. So is the increasing loss of civility (good manners). To preserve (or reestablish) the society we cherish, we need to use our freedom to speak to defend both speech and manners.

One of our Strengths

Two sights/thoughts are sure to bring tears to my eyes. One is seeing a child loose hope for its future. Almost nothing is sadder. The other is seeing people fighting for causes they believe in to help another person or society more generally. These happy tears are a response to the goodness in people.

But not everyone shares the same view of what the right cause is. Our founding fathers had the great wisdom to know that only by confronting the arguments for opposing views could we hope to find common ground or at least to understand and respect other views even if we did not share them and thus live peacefully together. So, in the very first Amendment to our constitutions (the Bill of Rights) they established that:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

We seem to be coming out of the sad generation over protected by “helicopter moms” who were so afraid of hearing something they might disagree with that they tried to ban such speech or demonstrations in direct violation of our Constitution. But the dangerous and pathetic Woke generation seems to be passing. The sharply different views over the tragic war in Israel and Palestine are testing our commitment to the wisdom of free speech and step by step that wisdom seems to be winning.

While the Millennials (the scardicat, afraid of their shadows generation mom kept from developing protective skins) tried to shut down and prevent encounters (speeches, demonstrations, etc.) that might offend their views (sought “safe spaces”), Gen Z seems to be reverting to the openness and search for the truth championed by our founding fathers.

There have always been some dissenters in every generation. Sadly a few people are just nasty (redneck fascist types). It’s hard for me to know how to characterize an adult like Governor DeSantis who cancels the self-governance contract with Disneyland and ordered the ban of the pro-Palestinian student group Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) from university campuses in Florida, because he doesn’t like what they are saying. “A Land of Immigrants”

We should go out of our way to hear views we might disagree with, but to be construction we should urge our “opponents” to debate politely, to be civil, and do so ourselves.  Name calling, for example calling criticism of the Israeli government “antisemitism,” does not contribute to better mutual understanding of difficult issues. Our demonstrations should always be peaceful. We have work to do on those fronts, but the urge to ban seems to be retreating. The following article about the evolving situation of opposing views on the Israeli/Hamas/Gaza wars is encouraging to me and well worth reading. https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-palestine-war-facing-suspension-mit-university-students-continue-pro-palestine-advocacy

Vivian Silver and Hamas

Vivian Silver, ”a 74-year-old Canadian Israeli peace activist, had vanished from her duplex in Kibbutz Beeri” on Oct 7 and is now one of the 242 hostages held by Hamas following their savage assault on Israel that killed 1,400 men women and children. “Israel war peace activist sons”

Israelis were and are divided over how Israel should respond to this attack. As of this writing (Nov 8) Israel’s bombing and ground attacks have killed over 10,000 Palestinians over half of them women and children. This ratio of Palestinians killed to Israelis killed (10 to 1.4) is about the same as the average over the last 50 years.

Israel’s savage attack on the people of Gaza was, in the words of Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu, “revenge”.  “Defending Israel”  But at a meeting in Jerusalem of hostage families, including Vivian’s two sons, Eli Cohen, the country’s foreign minister claimed that “Military pressure… would give Israel leverage in a hostage negotiation.”

Yonatan Zeigen, one of Vivian’s two sons, “believed that a ground invasion was not just bad strategy — it was immoral. It was a line Vivian might have said.”

Some days later while visiting the ruined remains of his mother’s home a solder leading a military tour of the ruins asked Yonatan: “’What do you think needs to be done about the hostages?’ And maybe it was because of where they stood, a few feet from his mother’s bedroom. Or because he was tired of trying to veil his opinions. This time, he made the moral argument.

“‘A cease-fire to save them,’ Yonatan replied.

“’Because the fighting puts them at risk?’ the soldier asked.

“’Yes, and I don’t think it’s the right thing to do.’

“’You don’t think it’s right to kill the terrorists?’

“’I think first we need to focus on the kidnapped people, and then make a major shift, and that will not come from war but from peace.’”

All of the above quotes are from the Washington Post article linked above. I recommend that you read it. I quote it at length to emphasize that every war casualty is an actual person with families and loved one impacted by their tragedy and that Israeli public opinion is very divided.

Hamas’ attack on Oct 7 was vicious and must be thoroughly condemned. Anger is a natural and understandable reaction, but it is not wise to determine how Israel can best protect itself from such atrocities in the future out of anger. Revenge is for foolish children. “Israel’s war in Gaza and Genocide” “Palestinian citizens Gaza war enemies”

Why did Hamas do what they did? Asking that question and seeking honest answers is not to forgive their atrocities but is necessary input to the development of a reaction that serves Israel best long run interest (which is living peacefully with its neighbors). We need to know and face up to Israel’s history of brutal treatment of the Palestinians they drove off their land to create Israel and those that continue to live in the so called West Bank and Gaza Strip. “Palestine Israel in perspective”

The brutal treatment of the Jews over their long history is well known and must not be forgotten either.

During one of my first visits to Israel to help implement the Oslo Accords provision for a Palestine Monetary Authority, I was driven by a very lovely estate in East Jerusalem by one of my Palestinian counterparts. She said: “that was my home and the home of my ancestors until the Jews drove us out. But I have given up demanding my ‘right of return’.” In 1948, Israeli forces drove an estimated 750,000 Palestinians out of their homes during the creation of Israel. In 1948, Israeli forces drove 750,000 Palestinians out in the Nakba – The Washington Post  The illegal Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank aim to complete the job. “Amid the mourning Israel’s settlement enterprise celebrates a great victory”

Israel will not enjoy, and flourish in, peace until it establishes just relations with its Palestinian neighbors. But the necessary two state solution outlined in the Oslo Accords is hampered by an incompetent Palestine Authority. I don’t generally favor excessive American interference in other countries affairs, but we must stop allowing Israel’s illegal settlements and their mistreatment of Palestinians and must more actively promote an effective and honest Palestinian government. We have the financial and other leverage to do so.

Dominique De Villepin, former Prime Minister of France, makes similar points that are well worth reading:   “Dominique de Villepin-on-the-conflict-in-Palestine”

Immigration and smuggling

America has a labor shortage. We need to widen the door to legal immigration and patrol our borders against illegal immigration and drug smuggling more effectively. The Biden administration has requested several billion dollars for that purpose and Congress should approve it. But how should it be paid for. “Congress funding of border control”

Every person and every country’s resources are limited. Their use for one thing means that they are not available to be used for something else. Budgets reflect our choices—our priorities. Increasing our border security would save tens of thousands of lives a year from reduced drug smuggling alone.

I suggest that we close our military bases in Europe and apply the money saved to increased border security and deficit reduction (sadly it would not be enough to reduce our debt only the deficit –i.e., the annual increase in debt). Our European bases cost $24.4 billion in 2018 (the latest figure I could find and with our support for the war in Ukraine it could only have increased). Our EU basses save no lives and add nothing to our security. They largely reduce the incentive for EU countries to provide for their own defense. But our immigration policy and border controls are a mess and should be improved.

Defending Palestine

“Thousands of protesters forced the closure of Grand Central station in New York on Friday night in a large sit-in against Israel’s bombardment of Gaza. The demonstration, [where] made up mostly of Jewish New Yorkers,” “Protest-New York Grand Central-Israel Gaza Palestine”   Bless them.

Palestinians killed by the Israeli military passed 8,000 on Oct 29. Over half were women and children. Hamas’s vicious attack on Israel Oct 7 killed 1,400 Israelis. All of those deaths should be condemned. When President Biden questioned the accuracy of the Gaza Health Ministry’s tally, many Muslims and Arab Americans were shocked and angered having previously been shocked at Biden’s blank check to Netanyahu to do whatever it takes to wipe out Hamas. “Biden Israel Palestine Muslim Americans war”   

“The United States vetoed a draft resolution at the UN Security Council which called for a humanitarian pause in besieged Gaza. The draft resolution, proposed by Brazil, condemned the October 7 terror attacks in Israel by Palestinian militant group Hamas, which killed over 1,400 people, and urged the release of hostages taken. It also called on all parties to comply with international law and protect civilian lives in Hamas-controlled Gaza amid a ferocious retaliation by Israeli warplanes. The international community should engineer “humanitarian pauses” in the fighting to allow for aid delivery, it said. Twelve of the council’s 15 members approved the draft on Wednesday, with the UK and Russia abstaining, and a US veto.” US vetoes Security Council call for ‘humanitarian pause’ in Israel-Hamas war | CNN

More recently the Biden White House has held meetings with its Muslim and Arab staff as well as Arab community leaders to gain a better understanding of the issues from their perspective. Biden now calls for a humanitarian pause and has cautioned Israel to minimize civilian casualties. “Biden Israel Palestine Muslim Americans’ war”

The claims of some that most Palestinians in Gaza support Hamas are simply false “What Palestinians really think about Hamas”  

The viciousness of the attacks by Hamas and Israel has sadly aroused some to challenge America’s cherished free speech tradition with the all too typical cry of antisemitism against those defending Palestinian rights. ”An Israeli American professor at Columbia University’s business school slammed his employer in a fiery speech on campus Wednesday night — ripping the university for apparently not publicly denouncing pro-Palestinian student organizations that he claimed are ‘pro-terror.’”  “Columbia professor rips university’s president over Israel Hamas war response”

But our freedom to speak is too important to our free society to be easily snuff out. Dozens of Columbia University and Bernard College faculty issued an open letter defending not only the right of its students to defend Palestinians but the substance of their letter as well.

The letter stated in part that “In our view, the student statement aims to recontextualize the events of October 7, 2023, pointing out that military operations and state violence did not begin that day, but rather it represented a military response by a people who had endured crushing and unrelenting state violence from an occupying power over many years…. It is worth noting that not all of us agree with every one of the claims made in the students’ statement, but we do agree that making such claims cannot and should not be considered anti-Semitic….

“We ask Columbia University’s leadership, our faculty colleagues, Columbia alumni, potential employers of Columbia students, and all who share a commitment to the notion of a just society to join us in condemning, in the strongest of terms, the vicious targeting of our students with doxing, public shaming, surveillance by members of our community, including other students, and reprisals from employers.” “Open letter from Columbia and Barnard faculties” Amen

We all need this discussion in order to hear and understand everyone’s point of view. Peace will not come to Israel and to the West Bank and Gaza Strip until the Jews and Palestinians living there reconcile their grievance’s and adhere to just treatment of all.