Anti-American Conference Flips and Flops
Anti-American elites have staged a conference in Brazil’s capital, Brasilia. And they immediately discovered their various gripes with “America” didn’t mesh. Nope, varied stripes of jealousy, hate, envy, and fear of liberty aren’t the foundation for a cohesive “united front,” though bellicose demands and “we’re victims” propaganda will get them headlines.
This report appears in the NY Times (May 11):
Leaders of South America and the Arab world, two regions that have had relatively little contact with each other but have long chafed at American dominance, gathered here on Tuesday to meet for the first time and to air their list of grievances.
“Air their list of grievances”– yes, exactly what this planet needs, another list of grievances, and yet another forum for publicizing the same old complaints. I sense a new media opportunity. Perhaps the “chafed” should start a blog for their grievances. Will their blog allow comments, so those of us “long chafed” at the lies and corruption of petty potentates can start “listing” our grievances with their rotten regimes?
The Times continues:
But the two blocs in attendance at the initial South American-Arab Nations Summit almost immediately voiced profoundly different priorities. In their opening speeches, President Abdelaziz Bouteflika of Algeria and Amr Moussa, secretary general of the Arab League, focused their criticisms on Israel and the United States and called for greater solidarity with the Palestinians.
South American leaders, however, sought to keep the emphasis on economic issues. “Our great challenge is to design a new international economic and commercial geography,” the Brazilian president, Luiz In?cio Lula da Silva, said in remarks inaugurating the event on Tuesday morning.
Brazil’s Da Silva is a “new left” leader. The Times picks up on one of Da Silva’s objectives, a permanent UN Security Council seat for Brazil. Brazilians have long pursued a permanent UNSC seat. Brazil is South America’s colossus, but Brazilians will also tell you (sometimes with a wry wink) “We’re tomorrow’s super-power.” And left unsaid is, tomorrow never comes.
The saga marches on:
The conference is a Brazilian initiative, part of a larger effort by the government of Mr. da Silva to project Brazil onto the world stage as a regional power and to secure a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council. It comes on the heels, however, of some embarrassing foreign policy missteps, like the collapse of Brazil’s bid to lead the World Trade Organization and a tiff with neighboring Argentina.
Attendance fell short of Brazil’s initial expectations, further depriving the event of some of its luster. While the majority of South America’s 12 presidents are participating, only 7 of the 22 Arab nations that were invited are represented by heads of state or government.
One Arab leader did make it, except he’s a Kurd. Still, Iraq does classify as an Arab nation. And he’s definitely not anti-American. For that matter, neither is Da Silva in any meaningful sense. But then that’s the game: America merely serves as a useful rhetorical target and scapegoat.
One of them was the new president of Iraq, Jalal Talabani, who was making his first trip abroad in that capacity. His presence and that of the president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, accounted for the extraordinary security precautions that had an estimated 9,000 soldiers and police officers in the streets of the Brazilian capital and shut down normal activities here.
Could the participants craft a unified position? Lurking in the background is Castra-wannabe Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, a man whose career is based on bullying opponents and baiting America.
Behind the scenes, the two blocs struggled to devise a final declaration that would be acceptable to both sides and not damage Brazil’s diplomatic aspirations. Diplomats here said the United States and the European Union had expressed concerns to participants at the tone of the draft that the Arab group were pushing with some support from Venezuela’s president, Hugo Ch?vez, Washington’s leading critic in South America.
The conference appears to have discussed the usual list of anti-Israel statements– Israel being the globe’s other useful rhetorical target and scapegoat.
I wonder if the other conferees asked President Talabani what he thinks of terrorism? Terrorism supported by Syria, Saddam’s cash hoard, and Al Qaeda’s backers?
The Brasilia conference also:
… called for an international conference to define what terrorism is, and endorsed the right of peoples to “resist foreign occupation in accordance with the principle of international legality and in compliance with international humanitarian law.”
Does this mean Algeria’s Berbers can continue to resist the Arab occupation that began the seventh and eighth centuries AD?
Shouldn’t they wait until Festivus for the airing of grievances?
Comment by Alex — 5/11/2005 @ 8:37 am
They all did agree to condemn Britain’s possession of the Falklands and they demanded the residents be evacuated and the islands handed over to Argentina. They didn’t mention whether the graves of the dead British soldiers would also have to be cleared out.
Comment by JimO — 5/11/2005 @ 9:25 am
I was just wondering if they had the feats of strength too, and whether to end thne conference someone had to wrestle Da SIlva to the ground…
Comment by jimbo — 5/11/2005 @ 9:53 am
I was in Rio for one of these - an event where Eurpean and S American leaders were invited but America was exluded - this was back in 1998 or 1999 I think The same old same old
Comment by Pogue Mahone — 5/11/2005 @ 10:37 am
Ok, let me see if I understand Austin’s point here. Is it “A bunch of countries that have greviences with the US got together to talk about them, which provided me with the opportunity to kibitz with witty, sarcastic comments. Cool! Analysis, I don’t need no stinkin’ analysis!!” Austin, could you publish a few tips on how to find work by kissin’ up to those in power, doing ‘golly geeze’ propaganda about military hardware, and throwin’ spit wads from the peanut gallery? I want to quit my real job and hire out as a fluffer like you.
Comment by GPilot — 5/11/2005 @ 10:39 am
GPilot Gee, Pilot, does not being outwardly anti-American qualify someone as a shill for the Bush administration? In any event, I’d rather be shillin’ for Bush than for Islamic fascists any day.
Comment by John Huettner — 5/11/2005 @ 10:48 am
This Arab-South America Conference looks like it had an ‘agenda’, at least from the Arabs’ point of view, and that was to ’spread the word’, the word being hatred of Israel and the US. Since South American countries traditionally have had very civil relations with the U.S. presidents, with the exception of Chavez who is unbalanced and will naturally side with the Arabs. Someone should slip the heads of states of the S.A. countries a few notes letting them know they’ve just been ‘used’ to further the Arab message. This wasn’t about ‘free trade’ from the Arab nations’ point of view. It may have been on the part of the S.A. countries, but the main message that was being ‘pushed’ was the same message it always is…hatred of the Jews and by extension, the U.S. I’m sure (at least I hope I’m not wrong) that Talabani went in good faith and once there and saw how the land lay, he’s too good a diplomat to indulge in anti-US comments for the sake of it at this gossipfest. I think he probably listened and kept his thoughts to himself. I hope he did anyway!
Comment by foreign devil on lgf — 5/11/2005 @ 10:49 am
They had a metal pole, but Chávez ‘nationalized’ it.
Comment by Amos — 5/11/2005 @ 10:50 am
Brazil got more press yesterday with the National Orgasm Day one of their mayors proclaimed.
Comment by Jerry — 5/11/2005 @ 11:12 am
If Brasilia is the ‘City of the Future’ and Brazil is the ‘Superpower of the Future’, ‘the Future’ is indeed pretty far off.. I’d still take the girl from Ipanema any day tho..
Comment by Otis Wildflower — 5/11/2005 @ 11:13 am
Regarding “Festivus” - did the Summit attendees get around to the “feats of strength”?
Comment by Ross — 5/11/2005 @ 11:18 am
Regarding “Festivus” - did the Summit attendees get around to the “feats of strength”?
Comment by Ross — 5/11/2005 @ 11:18 am
Brazil - the country of the future. Always has been, and always will be.
Comment by Bill — 5/11/2005 @ 11:44 am
What do all these countries have in common? They are all some of the most underachieving places on the planet. A third of Brazil’s 180 million people live on a dollar a day or less. Yeah, it’s superpower material all right. Sure. Believe it.
Comment by Polymath — 5/11/2005 @ 12:07 pm
Brasil was tipped to be a superpower in about 1900. Iran was tipped to be the next industrial powerhouse in about 1970.
Comment by Jonny — 5/11/2005 @ 12:30 pm
Actually, Austin, the old slogan is “Brazil is the country of the future, and it always will be”. But I do believe Iraq has the best opportunity now to inch closer to that reality than say Brazil, Algeria, Iran or Venezuela. At least they earned it the old fashioned way - blood (lots of it), sweat and tears!
Comment by Jack is Back! — 5/11/2005 @ 1:22 pm
Brazil a superpower? Would this be the same Brazil that cut down a whole bunch of jungle to build a brand new city (Brasilia) and didn’t bother installing fire hydrants or fire protection because the BUILDINGS were fireproof? And then got to watch one of those fireproof buildings be gutted by fire when some of the NON-fireproof furnishing caught fire? Superpower material. Riiiiiiight.
Comment by Barbara Skolaut — 5/11/2005 @ 1:24 pm
Ya know, I used to work with a Brazilian woman, from Brasilia, matter of fact. She was about 9/10ths of the way finished with the process of getting her American citizenship when OIF/OEF was launched. As a Marine and someone who have lived on 3 different continents and visited 5 of 7, she couldn’t believe that I think the way that I do, or even became a Marine. She would give me that same meme about Brazil being the next super-power & that we had “better start being a lot nicer to other countries and cultures.” She had a Master’s degree, so this was not an unintelligent woman, and as she expressed herself I was struck by the degree to which she didn’t think, but “felt”. I would ask polite but pointed questions about how they would bring about their “super-power” status…needless to say I never got a coherent answer. A lot of fluff about what’s possible, but never anything remotely concrete. By the time I left that job, I had ingrained in her a couple of well-known gems: -Human beings understand dignity, compassion and integrity. Predators understand strength. -Was has never ended anything. Except slavery, communism, naziism, and fascism. -Communism’s dead, socialism’s dying…let’s make some money. Taking it one screwed up immigrant at a time…. surf-actant
Comment by surf-actant — 5/11/2005 @ 1:38 pm
re 5: G-Pilot Sorry G-Pilot, my understanding is that a fluffer needs to be able to get a grip. You don’t qualify.
Comment by Redbull Junkie — 5/11/2005 @ 2:32 pm
Foreign Devil said: “South American countries traditionally have had very civil relations with the U.S. presidents” I agree that Brazil is unlikely to become a superpower this century, or even the next. But if anyone on this string had actually been to latin america (some of you apparently have)–Cancun and Tijuana don’t count–you’d know that popular sentiment there isn’t exactly pro-American. People I met there were usually friendly, but had no qualms about expressing alarm and resentment (hostility) about US foreign policy. “CIA” there has the same connotation “KGB” has for us–it was instrumental in overthrowing several democratically elected governments there. I can’t tell you how many times I found myself defending Bush to correct plain factual errors–and I am far from a supporter. This probably isn’t the place to air constructive criticism, but here’s a suggestion: listen to what the gripers have to say, try to understand their grievances, then work to address them if legitimate or ignore them if not. Karen Hughes’s new job is to figure how to pull US image abroad out of the gutter–even the president admits there’s a problem. Apparently for Austin, good PR is only for the weak and the gutless. Also, if Iraq is such a shining example of how foreigners should love America, why is it at this conference?
Comment by Dave B. — 5/11/2005 @ 3:15 pm
Dave B., if the new Iraqi government is acting like that of a normal nation and making friends where they can, including at silly anti-American yapfests, how does that make the U.S. look bad, exactly? Sounds like we’re not telling this guy where to jump, or else he’s not listening. Sounds like he’s doing his job. Suits me fine.
Comment by Erg — 5/11/2005 @ 4:15 pm
The future is one of the hardest things to predict.
Comment by chuck — 5/11/2005 @ 5:40 pm
Actually, I hope Talabani DID speak his mind. And that he will not sign on to whatever twisted piece of double-talk is released as the final communiqué.
Comment by Brian H — 5/11/2005 @ 5:49 pm
“Would this be the same Brazil that cut down a whole bunch of jungle to build a brand new city” If you’ll excuse some annoying nit-picking, Brasilia was built on the Brazilian plains, not in the jungle. The reason it was constructed there was to try and develop an otherwise undeveloped part of the country.
Comment by Adam — 5/12/2005 @ 8:52 am
[…] que decía hace unos días, no podemos con nuestra vocación de apoyar cuanta causa antioccidental haya en el mundo. Qué desperdicio de País. (Visto en Instapundit) Share and […]
Pingback by | Noticias — 4/21/2009 @ 6:09 am