The Impossible Dream and our Man of La Mancha

Article from Malta Independent.

“The recent Israeli complete mishandling of the Gaza bound flotilla incident as a result of which a commando raid on the Turkish-flagged ship left nine international activists dead, has even according to the US pro-Israeli media opened Israel to a torrent of criticism”

We seem to be reliving The Impossible Dream without the need for any apologies to the Man of La Mancha.

Pre-2008 elections we were told that “all is possible (or can be achieved) together” (flimkien kollox possibbli) – while the latest mantra runs on the new lines that Malta (which one should read: Lawrence Gonzi) is capable of achieving what is deemed impossible.

While trying to talk up the economy, the government’s fortunes as well as his own, the PM came up with the flowery comment that despite our limitations, Malta has shown (implicitly already) that it is capable of achieving things which many people, even experts, deem impossible.

I tend to agree that we have managed to do so in a number of niche areas, but government’s dismal performance, particularly since the last general elections, has made it manifestly clear that most of what has been achieved has been in spite of the Gonzi administration rather than thanks to it.

I have much trust and confidence in the Maltese people’s resilience and entrepreneurial streak, but cannot say the same for a jaded and ‘jet lagged’ administration that often tends to rely on a long term vision as an escape route from the harsh realities of day-to-day problems.

Last week I wrote about an imploding government. This contrasts sharply with government’s self definition of a party at the helm in search of an explosion of ideas.

I have always embraced creative thinking wherever it may emanate from, but it is evident that the PM’s not so new line of thought is but a rehashed minestra riscaldata or as the Italians often put it... un film gia’ visto!!!

In his urgent quest for a political life jacket the PM is trying hard – with little success – to revamp the image of his party when it is common knowledge that it is in tatters.

Not only the PL but even Maltese society in general cannot but judge Dr Gonzi on his actions rather than on his words.

His smooth talk had a two-pronged strategy.

To ignore the serious allegations of corruption that hog the headlines daily as well as the harsh realities that people – almost irrespective of income – were experiencing, but for the very inner circle that tends to grow smaller in number, but far more powerful in clout, in comparison with the far more PN inclusive days with EFA at the helm.

Before continuing to dream about achieving the impossible Gonzi should make sure that he and his side kicks will stop resorting invariably to the unthinkable!



Stretching it too far

One would have expected better from Minister Tonio Fenech but then the man has been in political freefall for quite a number of months now. Something that must have cost him the prospects of remaining at the top of the inner party list when it comes to succession planning at the helm of the party.

It was an insult to anyone’s intelligence when he replied to a PQ of mine that the decision to opt for a massive advertising blitz promoting Enemalta’s shift to heavy fuel oil as a clean air technology move was triggered by a consumer research study that was based on only 11 respondents, under the flimsy pretext that they were sufficiently representative of the various strata of society and that the exercise was carried out to keep the expense low i.e. some €500!! Never mind the total cost of the resultant adverts footed by Enemalta for which read the ordinary taxpayer.



Germany and illegal

immigration

It was indeed a pleasure meeting a high powered parliamentary delegation from the German Bundestag Internal Affairs Committee during a lengthy meeting with our Foreign and European Affairs Committee – particularly with illegal immigration as the main agenda item. Even more so once they come from a key member state of the EU.

On my part I raised the following issues:

• Their response to the EU southern members’ push for a relocation policy which would involve the redistribution of asylum seekers more evidently across the 27 member states.

• Their views on the bilateral Italian accord with Libya which seems to be the sole reason that explains the relatively reduced temporary inflow of illegal immigrants in Malta and whether they consider illegal immigration to pose a security threat from a geo-political angle.

• What Germany proposes to do in terms of concrete action about the criminal gangs that exploit refugees that are smuggled into European countries in search for new ways of life.



It was reassuring that members from both sides of the House made the point that there is a general feeling right across the political spectrum in Malta that EU attempts to introduce effective new strategies have failed so far because of a lack of political will to help the member states worst affected.



The fall out from the blockade

I have always argued – and still firmly believe – that in order to be friends of the Arab world and the Palestinians one should never jeopardise the Israeli’s rights to live in peace as well as within secure borders. There can be no balanced approach to the Middle East unless relations with the key players are balanced out too.

But there comes a time when one has to be critical without in any way allowing one’s criticism to tip over into anti-Semitism or any anti-Zionist propaganda.

The recent Israeli complete mishandling of the Gaza bound flotilla incident as a result of which a commando raid on the Turkish-flagged ship left nine international activists dead, has even according to the US pro-Israeli media opened Israel to a torrent of criticism.

The New York Times even described it as a grievous, self-inflicted wound that has: Damaged Israel’s ties with Turkey, once its closest ally in the Muslim world, given the Hamas-led government in Gaza a huge propaganda boost and complicated peace talks with the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. This has made it much tougher for the Obama administration to persuade the UN Security Council to put new sanctions on Iran’s nuclear programme – which Israeli officials insist is their top priority.

The same incident prodded the leading US think tank The Centre for Strategic International Studies to query through its lead writer Anthony H Cordesman whether Israel has become a strategic liability.

He made the point that any actual Israeli military intervention in an Arab state could prove as destabilising as beneficial. On the other hand he argued forcibly that the depth of America’s moral commitment does not justify or excuse actions by an Israeli government that unnecessarily makes Israel a strategic liability when it should remain an asset. It does not mean that the US should extend support to an Israeli government when that government fails to credibly pursue peace with its neighbours.

And it does not mean that the US has the slightest interest in supporting Israeli settlements in the West Bank or that the US should take a hard line position on Jerusalem that would effectively make it a Jewish rather than a mixed city.

Even more emphatically Cordesman stated: “It does not mean that the US should be passive when Israel makes a series of major strategic blunders – such as persisting in the strategic bombing of Lebanon during the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict; escalating its attack on Gaza long after it had achieved its key objectives; embarrassing the US President by announcing the expansion of Israeli building programmes in East Jerusalem at a critical moment in US efforts to put Israeli peace talks back on track, or sending commandos to seize a Turkish ship in a horribly mismanaged effort to halt the peace flotilla going to Gaza.”

The US might have obligations to Israel but it is time that Israel realised that it has obligations to the US too.

In an excellent reaction the highly regarded International Crisis Group that is fronted by eminent former Western leaders and politicians, looked at what is arguably the big picture.

That the incident is an indictment of a much broader policy towards Gaza for which Israel does not bear sole responsibility. For years, many in the international community have been complicit in a policy that aimed at isolating Gaza in the hope of weakening Hamas. This policy is morally appalling and politically self-defeating.

Even worse it has harmed the people of Gaza without loosening Hamas’s control.

Yet it has persisted regardless of evident failure.

The flotilla assault is according to the Group anything but a symptom of an approach that has been implicitly endorsed by many and is yet another stark illustration of the belated need for a comprehensive change in policy towards Gaza.

The end result is that the policy of isolating Gaza, seeking to turn its population against Hamas and endorsing a West Bank First policy and or approach was not an exclusively Israeli one.

It is our collective responsibility to ensure that the focus on this recent tragedy alone is to miss the much wider and more important political lessons.

Please visit the article archive for a list of available articles.