The Next Quivering UN Mouthpiece

The donkey race is afoot for the next UN Secretary General. Even though UN will still be singing Bolton Supreme, it is obviously a critical position; the top candidates have already been met by the American Jewish Leaders who have sidelined Kofi Annan after he had the audacity to criticize Israel for the death of UN observers. One would think that Israelis could fight their own battles.

The race is being led by a South Korean Ban Ki-Moon who is South Korea’s foreign minister and could be all for capitalistic-jingoistic-globalization. In second place is Mr. Shashi Tharoor, a writer of dubious credentials as an author who is currently serving as a UN undersecretary. I must admit that I have a certain bias for Mr. Tharoor, he is India and therefore will be in the hot seat when it comes to Pakistan, has spoken out against Hindutuva and does possess a certain Nehruian charm about him.

There is of course a quasi-Asian dark horse, a Muslim-Jordanian Prince named Zeid al- Hussein with his blondish hair and aristocratic looks that resemble a crusading knight, who enjoys amicable relationships with Israel. What could be more embarassing for a Muslim to have a Prince represent their abject poverty?
However, I am partial to Jayantha Dhanapala, the top U.N. disarmament official, from Sri Lankan myself. He spoke at the non-aligned conference . . . in Cuba

Dude what are you smoking?

The Armed Forces Journal, self described as the world's largest publisher of defense periodicals meeting the highest standards of independent journalism, has recently done an article called Blood brothers: how a better Middle East would look. The article written by Ralph Peters, author of many a spy thrillers and op-ed including his latest on Iraq, Dude where is my Civil War, has described a Middle East where the biggest losers are the ‘unnatural states’ of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and the biggest winners would be a Free Kurdistan, an Arab Shia state, a greater Baluchistan and an expanded Afghanistan.

The survey starts with noble intentions, that the current borders in the Middle East as “…drawn by self-interested Europeans” and that these “[borders] generate more trouble than can be consumed locally.” Then Mr. Peters support his thesis by exposing the wrongs suffered by the “cheated” population groups, such as the Kurds, Baluch and Arab Shia. Sadly, the Palestinians are not mentioned as a “cheated people”, the Israel Issue is shelved and the collateral effects of the Shock and Awe campaign are ignored.

In the wake of Nawab Akbar Bugti’s death, rumored to be by the American supplied bunker busting bombs used shamelessly by the Pakistan Army, a Greater Baluchistan seems a likely probability. However the vision of a depleted Pakistan as a Punjabi-Muhajir establishment stretching from Karachi to Islamabad (although I would argue that this would include Peshawar) ignores a fundamental issue, i.e. would the Pakistani Pashtuns would like to become a part of a Tajik lead Afghanistan?

Lastly, Mr. Peter dreams of a Kurdistan, “as the most pro-Western state between Bulgaria and Japan” are as deeply flawed as his visions of a ‘modern’ Afghanistan or a ‘democratic’ Arab Shia state. Traveling in the land of Kurds or Tajiks, it is clear that their politics are ultimately patterned by their faith. If Mr. Peter believes that cafes in Diyarbaqar or Baqlan are cheering the pro western democracies for appeasing Israel as Beirut was reduced to ashes then the question arises, Dude what are you smoking?