Rule of (martial) law

On 14th June, Sudan’s ruler, Omar al-Bashir, was allowed to leave South Africa following an African Union summit, despite a court order instructing him to be detained in the country while it investigated a warrant of arrest on charges of genocide issued by the International Criminal Court. According to South Africa’s Sunday Times newspaper, quoting an insider source, Jacob Zuma’s government decided to protect al-Bashir “even if it meant flouting court rulings and undermining the constitution,” – something denied by the government, yet it does seem the rule of law was treated as an optional extra. The same leniency was not extended to Rwanda’s intelligence chief, General Karenzi Karake, arrested in London on 20th June under a European Arrest Warrant for mass murder.
While the elites of countries should be brought to account for legal charges laid against them, it becomes more problematic when extradition procedures are applied to journalists, especially when the regime requesting the extradition is as repressive as the Egypt of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi. Yet Ahmed Mansour, a prominent Egyptian-British journalist and talk show host for Al Jazeera was intercepted at Berlin’s Tegel airport on 20th June while attempting to board a flight to Doha, Qatar, where Al Jazeera is principally based.
Eventually on 23rd June, Mansour was released but his case sparked protests and concerned comment from all of Germany’s political parties. Egypt has come a long way in a short time from the heady days of Tahrir Square after Hosni Mubarak’s downfall to flawed but genuine elections bringing to power Mohamed Morsi to al-Sisi’s military coup and subsequent ascension to the presidency in elections not regarded as free of fair by international observers. Qatar, which partly sponsors Al Jazeera, is seen by today’s Egypt as having close links with Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood Party.
On 22nd and 23rd June, the German-Egyptian Union for Democracy pressure group gathered roughly 100 protesters outside the Berlin jail where Mansour was being held, waving placards demanding freedom of Mansour, Egypt and journalism in general. The German Green Party’s Franziska Brantner demanded, “The Berlin judiciary should under no circumstances allow itself to become a willing tool of the capricious regime in Cairo.” Members of parliament from the ruling ‘Grand Coalition’ of Christian Democrats and Socialists also protested their deep concern. Rolf Mützenich, deputy parliamentary leader of the Social Democratic party, told the Mitteldeutsche Zeitung newspaper, “The Egyptian judiciary works by political guidelines. It is anything but independent.” Philipp Mißfedler, foreign policy spokeman for the Christian Democratic Union added, “I think deportations and extraditions to countries that have the death penalty are very problematic.”
Three Al Jazeera journalists, including Australian Peter Greste and Canadian Mohamed Fahmy, were arrested in Cairo in 2013 and sentenced to up to 10 years in prison on charges of supporting the Muslim Brotherhood. Greste was eventually released (and deported) after 400 days of captivity in February of this year, with Fahmy soon after granted bail. Their Egyptian colleague, Baher Mohamed, continues to languish in prison as an appeal is presented. Such a fate would no doubt have awaited Mansour.
Mansour told Al Jazeera in a video made while in jail in Berlin that his arrest was “based on a German order and not due to an Interpol order.” As with the rest of the West, Germany sees al-Sisi as a bulwark against chaos, both from across his border in Libya and within Egypt itself. It may or may not be coincidental to Mansour’s detention but when al-Sisi visited Germany in late May, he signed off on a multibillion-euro power turbine deal with the German engineering firm Siemens. Protests against his sojourn were offset by the 100 supporters flown in by Cairo to demonstrate their devotion to the Egyptian president (né coup leader). Though coming at the invitation of Chancellor Angela Merkel, the displeasure of officialdom was signalled by the speaker of Germany’s parliament (Bundestag) canvelling a meeting with him, citing human rights violations.
The widespread disquiet in Germany did lead to Mansour’s release, demonstrating that protests can have an unequivocally beneficial and effective outcome. Media freedom is under greater threat than anytime since the end of the Cold War and it is our duty to try as best to resist the reactionary tide. Mansour did make to Qatar but let us not forget the plight of Fahmy or Mohamed awaiting ‘retrial’.

Freedom under law but for whom?

The betrayal of Nelson Mandela's legacy becomes ever more complete and further proof that freedom fighters who become national leaders are like the girl with the curl in her hair - when they are good, they are very, very good; when they are bad, they are awful.  On the 800th anniversary of the signing of Magna Carta, South Africa's government blocked its judiciary and allowed indicted war criminal Omar al-Bashir of Sudan to fly home after attending an African Union summit.  South African freedom has been gradually eroded under first Thabo Mbeki and now (especially) Jacob Zuma, moving from de facto one-party state to de jure.
There is a grievance among African countries (or at least the elites who run them) that the International Criminal Court only targets malefactors from their continent, ignoring the fact the court was a direct response to trials of Balkan individuals for their role in atrocities during the disintegration of Yugoslavia, trying to make justice applicable to the world.  It also has Bashar al-Assad on its watchlist.  But these are mere blandishments to the likes of Zuma, who closed ranks with fellow autocrats at the AU, which used to be called the Organisation of African Unity or, in shorthand, the Dicators' Club.  It seems little has changed.

On another note yesterday, Glenn Greenwald gave a robust defence of Edward Snowden and his actions after weekend revelations that American and British spies were in jeopardy after Russian and Chinese intelligence agencies cracked (at least some of) the documents that Snowden took with him.  Greenwald said first of all that any files Snowden did take have already been disseminated to global media organisations and there was no evidence he had any more files on him.  The Sunday Times article was bad journalism because it took the word of anonymous government figures without questioning it, Greenwald went on.  Why did Russia give asylum to Snowden - to needle America of course.  But when questioned that there was no moral equivalence between Russia and the West. Greenwald blew it, lapsing into the juvenile anti-Americanism that is frequently a staple of The Guardian for whom he sometimes works.  Saying that Russia hasn't destroyed a country of 26 million in Iraq was foolish, illustrating a mindset stuck in 2003 and for whom the clock can never move on.  I was surprised he didn't reference Grenada in 1983 or the Vietnam War.  If your mindset is that rigid, it raises questions about your judgement.  And anyway, has he not been watching the news for the last seven years.  Russia has thrown in turmoil a country of 52 million in Ukraine, not to mention ravaging a country of 3.7 million in Georgia in 2008.  Then he said Russia didn't carry out illegal drone strikes but Russia doesn't need to when it can gun down its opponents in the street or deny them vital medical treatment when arrested on trumped-up charges.  Greenwald said Russi a didn't practice extraordinary rendition and dump its foes on "an island in the middle of the Atlantic - Guantanamo Bay."  Well, I wonder how all of Cuba likes being referred to as akin to St Helena but also Russia has a vast land ocean called Siberia and Greenwald doesn't know how the FSB (the KGB's successor) operates.  For Greenwald, if you're not the USA, you must be on the side of the angels and such a binary worldview is demagogic, unhelpful and untrue.  The interviewer on the Today programme didn't press him on this as it wasn't pertinent to the discussion but it undermined Greenwald's entire credibility.

Bilderberg 2015 - the 1% of the 1%

In Jon Ronson’s Them: Adventures with Extremists, at some considerable personal risk to himself, he infiltrates groups of radicals who wilfully occupy the fringes of society. Throughout them and their mythologies, the ‘Bilderberg Group’ repeatedly emerges as a noxious all-powerful cartel that seeks to reorder the world and yet is ignored by the global press. Building to a climax, Ronson manages to penetrate (rather easily it must be said) a Bilderberg meeting, seeing the likes of George W Bush, Henry Kissinger, Peter Mandelson and John Major (yes, John Major) engaging in a spirit of hedonism, even to the degree of lewd and outrageous ways. He concluded that Bilderberg was a giant ‘frat party’ for the rich and powerful but far from sinister.
Nevertheless, detractors slam it as unaccountable and it always draw protestors convinced of it wicked and furtive ways, while supporters claim it fosters international dialogue impossible in other formats. Two years ago, it was held in Watford in the UK, last year in Copenhagen, 2015 finds it in the sleepy setting of Telfs-Buchen, Austria. Founded in 1954 at the Dutch Hotel de Bilderberg, those deemed ‘movers and shakers’ are invited on an annual basis to a Shangri-La location close to a NATO airbase (to intercept airborne ‘hostiles’ and in place long before 9/11). George Osborne will be there as in previous editions as will Ed Balls – despite losing his parliamentary seat, he is still considered influential, though he may be rubbing shoulders in creased jackets with those on City trading floors who cheered his defeat.
The Bilderberg official website bizarrely includes a press release that is designated by the ‘editor’ “not for publication,” being the exact opposite of all other press releases which are crying out for publicity or at least a mention. Secrecy in plain view is Bilderberg’s key motif, although they not be flocking to a city centre again soon after Copenhagen last year. The Guardian is one of those who regularly thumbs its nose at such glowering disapproval of coverage (in the interests of transparency, of course), not surprising given that Ronson is a regular contributor to their pages. The Daily Telegraph also is not afraid to poke fun at attendees, both of those inside and the conspiracy theorists outside. The BBC is not afraid to cover the event despite (or even because) of the presence of Rona Fairhead, Chairman of the BBC Trust. Indeed, Martin Wolf, Chief Economics Commentator at The Financial Times is one of the guests. There is such a veritable welter of coverage at arguably the biggest open secret in the world that it is hard to find a fresh angle.
Kissinger will again be making his usual pilgrimage and one wonders at how his fellow Bilderbergers will remember him when he eventually passes away, if they will at all. Michael O’Leary, of Ryanair will be making his maiden trip and one shudders at the type of New World Order he would concoct, save that there would be a ream of hidden charges to which we would have to subscribe.
It’s not just businessmen and their political protégés and friends that make up the coterie – there are plenty of academics, thinktank specialists and lobbyists are also happy to dine at the table of Croesus, Anne Applebaum and neoconservative Richard Perle among the most prominent, while the only Russian welcome is professor of economics Sergei Guriev, though he is something of a refugee in Paris (incidentally the Bilderberg press release says that Russia is one of the items on the agenda). Ex-Queen Princess Beatrix of the Netherlands also fancies some of the Alpine air.
For all the fantasies surrounding Bilderberg, the reason the elite jamboree excites such feverish attention these days derives from the cult of celebrity. The rules of celebrity entail that every aspect of their lives should be open to scrutiny. Protestors at these parties are more annoyed that Bilderberg flouts this in a very old-fashioned manner.

The glue factory is fired up again

Finally, after nearly seven months, Newcastle United have a permanent head coach (not a manager).  Yet Steve McClaren represents a like-for-like replacement for Alan Pardew and the stodgy football served up as Middlesbrough threatens to come to Tyneside.  Indeed, Teesside was jokingly referred to as 'Steve McClaren's glue factory' in eery echoes of Animal Farm. Let us not forget that this was a man who said "we'll take the positives out of it" from a game where his Boro were thrashed 7-0 by Arsenal.
Sure, he has won trophies in the past, home and abroad but Pardew won the Johnstone's Paint Trophy so both had a sense of cup final success.  Indeed, the decisive penalty that led to Boro winning the League Cup against Bolton Wanderers in 2004 should have been re-taken after two touches were made (even if accidentally) before it ended up in the goal.  McClaren's run to the UEFA Cup Final was improbable and thrilling, often waiting for the opponents to go three goals up in the tie before staging a comeback through players less has-beens and more never-weres.  They were crushed 4-0 in the final.  McClaren only got the England job because Luiz Felipe Scolari turned it down - I remember the palpable reluctance in his appointment at the time, not in him, rather the rest of nation.  Scolari's blow-out in his second stint with Brazil suggest England may have had a lucky escape, especially as after turning down England, Scolari wound up at Chelsea where he didn't last a season (partially through refusing to station defenders on goalposts for corners - a source of great bounty for opposing sides).  But England were lacklustre against national sides of any real merit, ultimately losing 3-2 to Croatia at Wembley, when they only needed a draw to progress to the 2008 European Championship, as McClaren sheltered under an umbrella.
After the brolly imbroglio, McClaren went abroad.  His first spell in charge of Twente FC in the Dutch Eredivisie saw them finish second and then win the Netherlands top flight the following season.  But Dutch club football has been in a trough for a long time and McClaren's travails at top-flight German side Wolfsburg saw him ousted within half a season.  Back at Twente, like the second marriage of Richard Burton and Liz Taylor, it was doomed from the outset.
After protests by Aston Villa fans, McClaren's return to English football had to start in the second tier.  A disastrous time with Nottingham Forest saw him in the wilderness again before long.  Readmitted to polite society as a coach under Harry Redknapp at Queen's Park Rangers, he jumped ship to helm Derby County after Nigel Clough was given the heave-ho at the iPro Stadium (formerly Pride Park, where little pride has been seen).  A barnstorming season almost got Derby promoted automatically before they undeservedly lost in the play-off final to QPR.  Again in pole position to go up without complications this February, Derby collapsed, Newcastle Utd-style, winning two games in twelve and finishing outside even the play-offs.  McClaren got sacked.
He has now come to St James' Park after a thoroughly underwhelming career as a number one.  It's a victory for chief scout and de facto director of football Graham Carr, preserving his own power base and privileges.  McClaren also has the benefit of being a free agent, like Pardew on his appointment on Tyneside, with no compensation required.  I would have much preferred Patrick Vieira, who may have been unproven but was worth the risk, especially as he had contacts throughout Europe, had described St James Park as his favourite stadium and would have been the marquee signing needed to reinvigorate the club.  He could have flopped like Ruud Gullit but equally he may have thrived like Kevin Keegan (who was similarly inexperienced, Newcastle being his first managerial job).  But Vieira wanted control over player transfers and Carr prevailed, leaving the board to treat the respected Manchester City academy manager in the shameless way for which they have become renowned.  It was even said that Vieira was used as a pawn to speed up McClaren's decision-making about signing.
After the fifth-placed finish, Alan Pardew's win rate at Newcastle was 32.4%.  McClaren's at Middlesbrough was around 30%.  Newcastle won't get relegated with McClaren but they won't aim for the stars (even if reaching them is unlikely) and it remains to be seen whether McClaren is allowed to play strong sides in cup competitions.  The mission statement is to finish in eighth place after three years - how underwhelming.

An age long past and immediate

After finishing The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn last summer, I resolved to myself that the next classic fictional work of literature I would consume would be The Great Gatsby, another 'Great American Novel'.  After many distraction and displacements, I have completed my quarry.  I had Wolf Hall on my shelves from long before the television series I eschewed and works by Dyostevsky.  Anna Karenina is also high on my to-read list.  But it was The Great Gatsby that glittered most brightly, the encapsulation of the 'Roaring Twenties', a phrase maybe derived from "Roaring June" within its pages.
It became even more appropriate as the people being discussed (at least the main male protagonists) are roughly the same age as me, insofar as the main narrative unfolds.  If I can't claim to read 'one 'improving book or magazine a week' (unless on counts The Telegraph and The Guardian) like the aspirations of James Gatz, I have now finished a book that regularly finishes in the top-100 must-reads and before it is spoilt for me.
I can't say I'll do the same for those reading this - in fact I most certainly won't.  I tried to expunge the bare few images that Baz Luhrmann's abortive adaptation has seeded in my mind from its promotional footage.  After Gatsby, I'll most definitely give the movie a pass.  So here's the gig. Gatsby dies.  It is an appropriate full stop though as his personal and professional lives have or are collapsing.  In death, he is neglected and unloved as his first mentor Dan Cody, who met a similarly sudden and violent death and only those who valued him truly as a person (Nick Carraway, Gatz senior and a man who admired Gatsby's library), in addition to loyal former servants, attend his funeral.  Even a lodger who spent many months at Gatsby's pile prefers to attend a picnic than pay his respects.  All those who attended the lavish parties have simply moved on to the next party like the locusts they are.  And those who are rich but cause mayhem in the lives of others are similarly insulated.   Gatsby was almost certainly involved in shady business who let others do the dirty work in the era of Prohibition (making the parties even more special) but East Coasters respect for the hosts was ephemeral and only extended as far as the last party.
Written in 1926, Gastby's second mentor, Meyer Wolfshiem (who 'fixed the 1919 World Series') operates a company by the most extraordinary name - The Swastika Holding Company - seven years before that symbol took on dark resonance for Jews in Germany.  The coincidence is astounding for this traditionally ancient pattern.
But it is not the depiction of how the other half (or 1% in today's terminology) lives but the love story that surrounds Gatsby and the object of his affection, Daisy Buchanan that really captivates.  Gatsby is essentially a good person as is Daisy but they have been corrupted by circumstance and money and inevitably this rottenness cannot be sustained.  Yet for the brief brilliant moment, it captured what it meant to be in love, even if we should never go back to try and remake the past.  There is much more that can be said about The Great Gatsby; however, I prefer to let its rhythms percolate my mind rather than dissect it further.