| Username |
Post |
| Achilles |
Posted
on 02-Oct-02 03:34 PM
Sorry, I wasn't able to find the thread, but wasn't there one about 'talented people' being let to govern the lesser among us. Maybe it was about why P. Ontas shouldn't get into politics or some such thing. At one point the deabte had gone to the point about how the talented, articulate, Harvard educated (and later a Professor) Henry Kissinger had ejected America out of the the morass of Vietnam War. Was it Paschim who wrote that ? Well then, here's something I came across recently that might make you think otherwise.
"In interviews with Kissinger's former aide Daniel Davidson and others, the film recounts how, in the fall of 1968, when the outgoing President, Lyndon Johnson, and the Democratic candidate, Vice-President Hubert Humphrey, were sponsoring peace negotiations with the North Vietnamese, Kissinger served as an unofficial adviser to the American negotiators. At the same time, however, he was sending information to Humphrey's opponent, Richard Nixon, a man he hated, whereupon Nixon used his own channels to convince President Nguyen Van Thieu, of South Vietnam, that the Republicans could get him a better deal. Three days before the American election, Thieu withdrew his approval from the developing peace plan, at which point the talks collapsed. Humphrey was discredited, Nixon was narrowly elected, and Kissinger, who until then had worked for Nelson Rockefeller, was made national-security adviser. Obsessed with American "credibility," Kissinger and Nixon secretly expanded the war into Cambodia. Four years passed from the time of Nixon's Inauguration, and another twenty thousand Americans and untold Vietnamese and Cambodians died before Kissinger worked out a peace deal with North Vietnam, which was almost identical to the arrangement he had helped sabotage in 1968."
So much for Kissinger the peacemaker.
BTW, you can count on me that the above excerpt is from a publication that had the most rigorous 'fact-checking' system in place.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 02-Oct-02 05:37 PM
Paschim used that particular argument roughly as a rebuttal to my "look, what the
best and the brightest did in Vietnam" point in that particular topic. (My line of thought generally came, as I wrote then, from a book by David Halberstam called, well,
The Best and The Brightest -- it's a book I recommend to all.)
At the time of the sajha debate, citing particular examples from the Panchayati period, Rajiv Gandhi's India and Kennedy's administration, the THRUST of my argument was roughly along the line of:
(Despite high expectations from one's friends, colleagues, parents and relatives-- all of whom tend to be relatively uncritical supporters ), the so-called best and brightest (whether educated at Harvard or Tribhuwan) would fare NO better than the dumb and the dumbest in an open, messy, plural democratic political structure such as the one we have, for better or worse, in Nepal.
I further argued that it was a myth to believe that one's academic/intellectual success (which is achieved through individual effort) would somehow translate quite well when
it came to achieving political/electoral success, which is achieved by making coalitions, making compromises and working with people who are different from oneself.
That said, on a general level, I wish the Pratyoush Ontas of the world all the best if
they are indeed contemplating careers in politics. It's just that I, for one, remain humbled by the fact that the evidence in support of the "myth" that best and the brightest would/could lead a (democratic) country to greater goodness has been
pretty spotty anywhere you look.
Pratyoush Ontas of the world should get into politics NOT because they are honest,
nor too because they are well-educated and all that, but because they are, come hell or highwater, committed to bring out positive changes, to make a difference in people's lives through by engaging the mechanisms of electoral politcs. My concern is that in the search for honest people and smart people for our politics, a la Rabindra Mishra, this point gets a short shrift.
Fortunately or unfortunately, this commitment to bring out positive changes, to make a difference in people's lives through politics LIES also in the domain of not-so-smart and not-so-honest people too, so there's hope that ordinary Ram and Shyam too can aspire to doing good work in Nepali politics.
As for Kissinger, the book "Kissinger" by Walter Issacson remains a definite tome (at least to me) to understand this super-smart but complicated character's complicity and duplicity in the period that is known as the Vietnam War.
oohi
"taking a beak from work " :-)
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 02-Oct-02 08:21 PM
Achilles, thanks for the note above -- Kissinger's role as peacemaker is hotly debated -- it spans the extremes, from the brilliant statesman and Nobel laureate to a hated "war criminal" (Christopher Hitchens, a columnist for Vogue, has published a whole book on this). Walter Isaacson's book also portrays Kissinger's bewildering character convincingly. These topics are utterly complex, and we may never know what exactly transpired -- but the "pursuit of truth" continues with fresh research and with new sources. I am just a student of diplomacy and history. While Kissinger's grasp of both has utterly impressed me (pls. refer to his 800 scholarly work, "Diplomacy"), I am absolutely open to reading alternative interpretations of these crucial times and being better informed. By virtue of my actual location now in Indochina, I am also closely reading up and speaking to natives on the troubled history of this part of the world. The learning continues, and in the process, all we can do is be humble about our own knowledge of stuff, hoina? But pls. kindly cite for me which publication you lifted that excerpt from…I'd appreciate that and would like to read the complete piece…The New Yorker has long had a reputation for having the best "fact-checking" apparatus in place. Is it from there by any chance?
On the general issues of talent, leadership, democratization, etc., please refer to the complete, original discussions on this at the following thread. I personally don't find it a useful enterprise to respond to re-interpreted fragments of what I might have said or not. What I said exists below in my own words -- and for now, I stand by my remarks therein.
http://sajha.com/sajha/html/OpenThread.cfm?forum=2&ThreadID=6852
|
| Achilles |
Posted
on 03-Oct-02 09:52 AM
Paschim,
You are right. The piece is indeed from the New Yorker. Here's the link
http://www.newyorker.com/critics/cinema/?021007crci_cinema
BTW, is it only me but it takes inordiantely long to load gbnc.org. Not a site you can visit too often.
|
| paramendra |
Posted
on 03-Oct-02 11:01 AM
Ashus's observations: "..... political/electoral success, which is achieved by making coalitions, making compromises and working with people who are different from oneself ..... engaging the mechanisms of electoral politcs ....... ordinary Ram and Shyam too can aspire to doing good work in Nepali politics ..... taking a beak from work ...."
I mean, what is there to disagree here, except for the beak part!
Paschim: "By virtue of my actual location now in Indochina, I am also closely reading up and speaking to natives on the troubled history of this part of the world."
Please elaborate. I met many Chinese and Vietnamese students at college who, in the safe haven of America, away from the "persecuters" sounded so anti-American-propaganda of what happened/happens.
Kissinger is a complex character. The Vietnam War was a complex part of American history. And debates will rage on. But I am glad people are taking sides.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 03-Oct-02 11:08 AM
As a matter of simple fact-checking, Christopher Hitchens -- a contrarian par
excellence and who writes like a latter-day George Orwell -- has long been a
columnist at two American magazines: "The Nation" and "The Vanity Fair".
In fact, I have long a reader fof his "minority report" column in The Nation.
For more info:
http://www.enteract.com/~peterk/
As it happens, Hitchens quit his job at The Nation just last week.
Here's a link to his farewell piece.
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20021014&s=hitchens
Then again, to quote Paschim: "The learning continues, and in the process, all we
can do is be humble about our own knowledge of stuff."
I like the word "humble" for its honest implications.
Meantime, thanks to Trailokya for loaning me Hitchen ko that book "The Trial of Henry Kissinger" today at the end of the very wonderful Chinese-language Table at
Himalayan Java Coffee House. The Kissinger book going to be week-end reading.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 03-Oct-02 08:38 PM
Achilless -- many thanks for that link to the New Yorker. Just read the review of the documentary on Kissinger's Trials (in absentia). The New Yorker seldom disappoints! As Maynard Keynes told a journalist once "When facts change, I change my views. What do you do, Sir?". I've long admired that quip -- but for now I'll just have to wait to be convinced of the new facts and arguments :) That hasn't quite happened. That final paragraph on another tragic documentary, "Bloody Sunday" also sounds like worth watching. I also recommend (my favorite rock band) U2's song by the same title.
I made a mistake on Hitchens's affiliation. Thanks Ashu for pointing that out. He is with Vanity Fair, not Vogue -- magazines of the same genre starting with the same letter V -- I should have spent 30 seconds on Google and checked my facts on the first item of the search. Also saw another minor mistake above -- I meant Kissinger's (one) 800 PAGE scholarly work on "Diplomacy", not 800 DIFFERENT works on the subject!
Paramendra -- the learning continues for me on this topic. We'll share what each of us knows, kunai deen!
|
| VillageVoice |
Posted
on 03-Oct-02 10:44 PM
I didn't exactly have a great experience the last time I tried to get between two GBNC stars - Ashu and Paschim. But never mind; I take the bait again.
The topic is simply irresistable.
Thanks Achilles for restarting the debate.
Yes, I do believe that the likes of Pratyoush Ontas will make a difference - huge, huge difference - to Nepal's politics.
Here's why. (Disclaimer: I am not launching into an academic debate on Henry Kissinger's wartime efforts, or Halberstam's writing. I have mixed feelings about them both - even Halberstam. Rather, I will walk around a far more familiar terrain: Nepali politics.)
I read Rabindra Mishra's article (Re: Bhoomadhya Rekha, Nepal fortnightly) as a call to elevate the dacadent Nepali politics.
What will Pratyoush's or Paschim's (Ashu has already opted out, right?) entry into party politics bring:
1. Integrity:
A year ago, when Deuba started out as the Prime Minister (replacing GPK), he
projected himself as a true-blue democrat with a clear edge over koirala - political flexibility and good rapport with the palace. Fair enough.
A year on? He seems to have made very little effort to explain to the Nepali people why the parliament had to be dissolved in the first place, and then the local bodies. And now the postponement of elections, all issues of enormous gravity.
He sits tight in the cockpit, but assumes the nation is in auto-pilot.
He is so flexible I doubt if he can stand up. He refuses to own up responsibilities. He never makes mistakes. It's always Koirala, Khum Bahadur, Wagle, Shailaja, Daman, Surya Bahadur.
You can count on Pratyoush and Paschim to stand tall and make themselves heard.
2. Learning:
Pratyoush, more than Deuba, is likely to spend more time reading, writing, and reflecting. And is also more likely to look at his performances critically. Deuba, on the other hand, is surrounded by psycophants who tell him what he wants to hear: "Well done, sire, well done. Kya dinoo bhayo ba. Wah. Wah !!!"
P's (assuming he becomes an influential party functionary. A far shot certainly!!) learning will reflect in his deliberations and speeches, and that will have some bearing on the quality of national debates. Not the least, scores of kangressis/amales willl start buying (or borrowing) books he recommends/quotes. At least some will read them.
3. Confidence
Pratyoush is not a simpleton. His Ivy League background gives him a solid footing on the world stage, and he is more likely to make a case for himself with Bush, Blair or Bandaranaike.
Deuba, on the other hand, struggled to make himself understood at two important foreign policy forums during his US trip early this year - in DC and in New York (Asia Foudation). It took Saubhagya Jung Shah, a Harvard scholar and a Fulbrighter, to control the damage later.
4. Inspiration for the like-minded.
JFK's Harvard mates, and Rajiv Gandhi's Doon buddies are the case in point.
Of couse, these are just random thoughts. One is welcome to add to the list. Or disagree.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 04-Oct-02 12:29 AM
isolated freak challenges all you harrvard educated policy makers, independent consultants, HMG policy makers, truck drivers crusing this side at the speed of 90 miles/hr and fulbright scholars in NY.
Kissinger's affiliation with Harvard and few books with white lies does not prove anything. Its one thing to sit down and write books but its another thing to actually be in a position where you can change things and make policies. paschim, you brag about being the youngest person that the HMG hired to make policies. How was it? Did you actually get to apply the theories that you learned in school? Was it like discussing Harvard Negotiation's Team's or Business school's case studies and coming to an agreement like you did with your peers at Harvard? One does not have to read Kissinger's Diplomacy to Does America need a foreign policy to Nixon years to The years of Upheavel to The years of renewal to understand and learn about diplomacy. If you are that interested in learning about (as you claim to be a student of IR), why not try Buzan, Little, Scott. Carruthers and other writers? Kissinger's book, Diplomacy is a great read, if you only read the first 15 chapetrs. After that, its plain crap.
No, Kissinger's harvard affiliation did not turn him into a good diplomat. he got the nobel peace prize, but it proves nothing. He unnecessarily prolonged the war, then met the viet-congs in Paris, again agreed to prolong the war so that he could win the nobel peace prize. I personally don't think that they teach "covert operations" and "kill civilians to get the nobel peace prize" theories at Harvard, or do they? Please educate me.
Kissinger was a bad leader, let's face this truth. it doesn't harm to say a crook to a crook.
Whether or not people like Pratyush Onta will be successful in Nepali politics, the question itself cracks me up. Some Rabindra Mishra writes that he should (or people like him) should get involved in the Nepali politics and everybody, even people who do not know anything about the nepali bureaucracy, system and internal politics are like, go pratysh go GO GO.. and right on dude!
OK Pratyush, i don't know him personally, might be an intelligent, nationalist and superbrilliant guy, but will he prove successful in the arena of Nepali politics? The answer is NO. One does not need to be as brillian or shrewd like kisinger to answer this simple question. Chances of Onta being a failure are more than being successful because the theories he learned at schools in Nepal, JNU, vandeerbeis or UPENN don't work in Nepal. Nothing works in Nepal and this has been the norm since 2007. its not that we never had educated leaders, but what could they do when the whole system is faulty? NOTHING.
Its one thing to be a SLC topper and this and that, another thing to manage and run the country. A peasant from Rolpa might prove a better leader than Onta becase he won't be coming to Singha durbar with the aim of totakl transformation of Nepal. Onta, on the other hand will become totally dysfuncional the moment he enters Singha Durbar because his education and background makes him think in BROADER terms, which people can't actually relate to.
isolated freak is a retard and is back from mental assylum to challenge the nepali bidwans of cyberspace.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 04-Oct-02 06:09 AM
Isolated freak, welcome back from the mental asylum (as you claim). Tara, yessai narisai dinus na, mitra :)
A few points:
1. No, I am not a student of IR. Never claimed that. No, I also haven't "bragged" about being the "youngest person that HMG hired to make policies". Yes, I was involved in an HMG policy exercise recently. As a young person I was honored to have been asked, and was pleased to accept the invitation. For that team task, I combined *aspects* of my formal training at universities, lessons from my past work experiences, and a set of personal strengths.
2. Mr. Kissinger is no Mother Teresa. I am preserving an open mind about his record as Secretary of State. As a student of diplomatic history, I remain dazzled by that man's elemental grasp of the subject in "Diplomacy".
3. The Pratyoush Ontas (PO) won't and can't fix national woes overnight. But Nepali politics will be a better place with better educated men and women with integrity. If the POs choose to join multiparty politics, they will have to begin their "careers" with party membership, cultivation of constituency support for their cause and agenda, victories at intra and inter party electoral contests, assumption of high office at the village, provincial or central level. This trajectory will entail many years of hard work and sacrifice and a high probability of "failure". But should they "succeed", like good politicians or great statesmen they can dramatically alter the landscape of the turf they are involved in (often for the better) -- their turf could be a remote village, sano jilla, thulo nagar palika, or the entire rastra. Public service is a grand professional choice, fraught with distinct difficulties. As a concerned citizen, I will thus be wishing those men and women with integrity who make a conscious decision to become public servants all my very best wishes.
Isolated Freak, you have a good weekend brother. Mine has begun, and I am off to see Madhuri Dixit's "Devdas". For the second time in a month. Isn't she just lovely? :)
-----
VV, appreciate your remarks.
|
| VillageVoice |
Posted
on 04-Oct-02 06:38 AM
Correction: The New York forum I was referrring to is Asia Society - not Asia Foundation.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 04-Oct-02 08:05 AM
>>For that team task, I combined *aspects* of my formal training at universities, lessons from my past work experiences, and a set of personal strengths.
see, you yourself agree that education alone is not enough to get things done in Nepal. There are many factors involved. I don't know how much personal strengths you have (maybe yo are able to impress 300 people including University of Hawaii trained statistician at NPS and others, mainly PS MAHAT by your brain or muscles, that i don't know mitra, but have we seen Pratush in Rajniti yet? Do we know about his personal strengths--from impressing the educated to slaughtering water buffalos to doing all that it needs done to achieve the national goals? I am an isolated freak, don't know much about anybody.
Kissinger is no mother terresa or chankaya or even King mahnedra of nepal. His 923 ppp book (including the end notes and index) is a great read for the first 15 chapters that is
"America Re-enters the Arena. Franklin Delano Roosevelt" page 369. The remaining 500 pages are C-R-A-P.
I think i read your post that said something that you were actually the youngest one to get appointed/hired by the HMG to make policies and somebody had instanly corrected you saying that Dr. Bhesh Bahadur Thapa, was the youngest one. But being a freak, i might have misread the whole thing. Immediately after reading that post, i went into comma because you shattered my dreams of being the youngest policy maker :-(, did not wake up for 30 days and when i woke up that depressingly deepressing Devdas movie was out, went to see that, saw it back to back twice, got into drinking and lost my mental control. But thanks to dr. Pagal bahula of the mental hospital, i am starting to recover and "think (un) strategically" to "get (ting) to yes" with the legendary "W" ( IS woodrow Wilson still alive?)
Why Onta, Onta, Onta? You come to Nepal, get involed in politics since its a family affair for you, do things to change things and i'll vote for you. But will you be interested to join the nepali politics? Has anyone tried to get Onta's views on this? Aren't we all failed diplomats, somehow retards who are discussing about Onta w/o even getting his take on things. Is he up for getting into politics? This all says that we are just spending our time and energy for nothing. I was better off in the assylum.
alrite, freak had enough for a year. See you all next year, this time, this place . Until then, bye-bye, goodnight, namaste and hampampamnamlam or whatever they say in vietnamese.
time for my prozac.
|
