| |
|
11. oktober 2002
|
|
Walt Whitman
Most of my exposure to poetry has been Norwegian poets. I am now discovering American poetry. Mike at Dances with Cactus gave me a link to a great resource for Whitman poetry.
...of the pondering over all is truth class...
8:47:36 PM 
|
|
One Prize, Three Messages
People can read at least three different messages out of the decision to award the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize to Jimmy Carter.
 The first, and the explicit message, is in recognizing the great work of Jimmy Carter and the Carter Center. Jimmy Carter has, as the Nobel committee says, worked tirelessly for human rights and to resolve international conflicts through peaceful means. I hope the other interpretations, which I will outline below, does not overshadow this fact. When the 1978 award was given to Sadat and Begin, the committee had wanted to also give it to Carter, but were prevented from doing so since nobody had nominated him within the deadline. This prize is long overdue, and has been met with praise from world leaders.
The second message, made pretty bluntly by the Nobel committee chairman Gunnar Berge when he spoke to the press afterwards, is an implied criticism of the Bush administration's unilateralism on Iraq. It must be noted, however, that not all committee members agree with this, and Berge merely expressed his personal opinion. Carter has been an outspoken critic of Bush's Iraq policy. No doubt this perspective will make a number of headlines in the coming days, especially if the Nobel Prize ceremony takes place on December 10 while bombs are raining over Baghdad.
The third message is that the parties in the deadlocked Israeli-Palestinian conflict should return to the negotiating table. Carter's vision brought Egypt and Israel to the negotiating table and completed the process which delivered the Camp David Accord. At the time, this accord was widely unpopular both in the Arab world and with rightist Israelis alike. Prize winner Sadat was later assassinated by militants partly for accepting a peace accord with the arch enemy Israel. Hawks on both sides oppose peaceful solutions in the Middle East today, too. If this prize helps bringing attention to a possible solution to this tragic conflict, Alfred Nobel's Peace Prize will accomplish more than its creator could possibly have expected.
4:20:33 PM
|
|
A Rational Approach to the Iraq Threat
I added this article to my stories section.
3:44:37 PM
|
|
Most Hated Man in Scotland
 Berti Vogts, the manager of Scotland's national football team, is easily the most unpopular man in the country, after the side's dismal performance on the field. The Guardian presents a number of photoshop'd pictures of the German expat under fire, including the one on the right, showing Vogt as the English king who was soundly beaten by the Scots (remember Braveheart?). The artist, Grant Campbell, says "Berti's doing a better job of sending Scotland back to the Dark ages than anybody since Edward Longshanks."
The Scots tend to take their football seriously, and have a very long memory.
12:36:31 PM
|
|
Jimmy Carter Wins Nobel Peace Prize
 Former US President Jimmy Carter is awarded the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize.
The Nobel committee says that organizing the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt is in itself sufficient reason for the award. This resulted in the 1978 Peace Prize being given to Menachem Begin and Al-Mohammad Anwar Sadat.
Since then, Carter has been working to broker peace deals in near every corner of the globe. Being a true expert on negotiations and dedicated to human rights, in 1982, Carter and his wife Rosalynn started the Carter Center, to work with human rights and for the prevention of conflicts worldwide. Carter has been nominated for the prize a number of times.
The Nobel committee chairman Gunnar Berge made in clear at the press conference that this prize was also a criticism of the Bush administration's unilateralism on Iraq. Jimmy Carter opposes a US-lead attack on Iraq without a UN mandate. Berge agreed that it was a paradox that the prize is awarded simultanously with the US Congress authorizing use of force against Iraq, but assumed it had to be a coincidence.
My take: a truly well-deserved recognition for one of the most genuinely sincere and honest leaders of the 20th century. Even his opponents in the US tend to agree that his failure as a President is partly due to his deep conviction and morality. He simply had too many scruples for the job.
11:46:47 AM
|
|
Balance
Two columns offering opposing opinions on Bush and Iraq can be found on the Salon front page right now.
Andrew Sullivan makes a decent case that the Bush administration is not pursuing an imperialist policy by any reasonable standard. Both the far right and the far left are wrong, he states, and Bush's apparent plan to depose Saddam Hussein is in fact anti-imperialist.
Robert Scheer, on the other hand, calls the Bush administration's hawks 'wannabe imperialists,' and argues that the recent CIA's report on Iraq seriously undermines Bush's claims about Saddam Hussein. On the contrary, the arms inspections and the recurring coalition airstrikes have seriously diminished Iraq's capabilities. The sensible course, then, is to resume the arms inspections immediately.
I am sure we all have opinions on this. My point here is to applaud Salon for providing its readers with both sides of the argument.
1:13:12 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2002 Jan Haugland.
Last update: 01.11.02; 00:16:34.
|
|
|
