Connect with us

Politics

A Biden win could shake up Bay State politics – Boston Herald

Published

on


Look for U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren to join the Joe Biden administration should the former vice president beat President Trump in November.

That means that Republican Gov. Charlie Baker would appoint someone — perhaps himself — to fill out the remainder of Democrat Warren’s Senate term, which runs to 2024.

While Warren may still be in the running as a potential vice-presidential running mate — since Biden has promised to select a woman — it appears that Biden is leaning more toward choosing a woman of color.

Also, Warren does not appear to do much for a Biden ticket. While she appeals to progressives and left-wing, capitalist-hating activists, she failed to win a single Democratic presidential primary, including her home state of Massachusetts.

While Warren may be out of the running for vice president, there is a strong possibility that she could be appointed to a Biden cabinet, possibly as secretary of the Treasury, should Biden be elected.

If Wall Street thinks that it caught a break when Warren folded as a presidential candidate, they had better think again.

But Biden will first have to meet Trump in debates and beat him, if he ever decides to come out of his basement and hit the campaign trail. But, at the rate the polls are trending in his favor, he may decide to stay down there and remain a stealth candidate.

As it is, the Biden-loving establishment media, giddy over the polling, hate Trump so much that they dream of carrying a stumbling, fumbling Biden into the White House on their shoulders should he — and they — defeat Trump.

But remember, these are the same polls and pollsters who had Hillary Clinton soundly beating Trump in 2016.

At any rate, news last week that Biden might consider appointing Warren to the Treasury had Wall Street abuzz. Warren, who not only took credit for starting the Occupy Wall Street movement several years ago, now wants to break up the big banks.

“We believe Warren would be an especially powerful Treasury secretary with Biden likely delegating to her primary responsibility for financial and economic policy,” said Jaret Seiber, policy analyst at Cowen Washington Research Group, in a message to financial clients.

“If it is Elizabeth Warren at Treasury, the tone will be quite harsh for banks,” another top financial analyst said.

Warren is not only in favor breaking up the big banks, she would also restore a myriad of banking and business regulations that have been negated by the Trump administration.

She also would limit the compensation paid to Wall Street executives, stop banks from paying dividends, and halt debt-collecting entities from filing lawsuits and wage garnishment practices during the pandemic.

While it appears far-fetched that this could happen, it is no more far-fetched than Trump defeating Clinton in 2016.

If a Warren Senate vacancy occurs, Baker has the authority to appoint a successor until a special election is held within 145 to 160 days of the vacancy.

If he were interested in the job, Baker could step down as governor and have Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito become acting governor and appoint him as the interim senator. Being a homebody, that appears unlikely. However, if he wanted to name a fellow Republican, he could appoint Polito.

Baker would have to move fast. In the past the Democratic-controlled Legislature has blocked a Republican governor from making such an appointment by going straight to a special election.

The Legislature did this in 2004 when Republican Mitt Romney was governor and it appeared that Democrat Sen. John Kerry’s seat might become vacant should he be elected president. He wasn’t.

The Democrats later restored the appointing power to the governor when Democrat Deval Patrick was governor, paving the way for him to appoint Paul Kirk, a former Sen. Ted Kennedy aide, to complete Kennedy’s term following his death in 2009, and to name Mo Cowan, a former chief of staff, to complete John Kerry’s term when Kerry became secretary of state in 2013.

It all could happen again. But don’t hold your breath.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Politics

How Trump erased the election-year line between politics and policy – NBC News

Published

on


WASHINGTON — In the past few months, President Donald Trump has invited supporters wearing “Make America Great Again” campaign gear onstage with him during official presidential speeches. He has criticized Democratic rival Joe Biden in Rose Garden addresses. He has played campaign-style videos in the White House briefing room, and he has used his campaign playlist, typically reserved for rallies, at official presidential events.

Presidents running for re-election have traditionally worked to balance official government business with campaign activity. But government watchdogs and officials from past administrations warn that Trump has smashed that norm, showing an unusual willingness to use his presidential platform for political purposes.

Trump’s penchant for blurring the lines between his campaign and his official duties came to a head last week when he confirmed that he was considering giving his acceptance speech for the Republican presidential nomination — one of the most anticipated moments of the election season — from the White House South Lawn.

“I’ll probably do mine live from the White House,” Trump said on Fox News. “The easiest, least expensive and, I think, very beautiful [location] would be live from the White House.”

Presidential ethics veterans said the savings weren’t his to take. “What Trump is doing is a form of stealing,” said Norm Eisen, who was President Barack Obama’s special counsel and special assistant for ethics and government reform.

Aug. 6, 202001:45

“The taxpayer entrusts funds to the government to do the official business of the government. If they want to support a political candidate, they make a political contribution,” he said. “For Trump to effectively be reaching into all of our pockets to subsidize his proposed activity on the South Lawn … no, the taxpayer should not have to pay for that.”

Trump’s boundary stretching goes beyond the location of his acceptance speech, Eisen and others said.

The president has increasingly turned official White House events, both in Washington and on the road, into political events as the coronavirus pandemic has kept him off the usual campaign trail and unable to hold large in-person rallies.

Since March, Trump has taken official presidential trips to Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, North Carolina and Ohio. He has also made multiple visits to Arizona, Texas and Florida. All of those states are critical to Trump’s re-election.

“It’s always been a fine line that presidents ride with making sure that the official activity in an election year does not go too far into campaign activity,” said Kedric Payne, general counsel and senior director of ethics at the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit advocacy group. Trump, Payne said, is “barely disguising it as official activity.”

On an official government trip to Texas in July, for example, a senior administration official told NBC News that the visit was intended to highlight Trump’s energy policy and contrast it with that of Biden’s. On another official White House trip in June, to Arizona, the president headlined an event hosted by Students for Trump at a Phoenix church.

On his most recent presidential trip last week, to Ohio, the White House said Trump was met on Air Force One by a campaign senior adviser in the state, Bob Paduchik. The president held a small campaign-style rally on the tarmac and then visited a Whirlpool factory, where he made fun of Biden (“Did you ever watch Biden, where he’s always saying the wrong state?”). He rounded out the journey with a supporters roundtable and a campaign fundraiser.

The trips can become expensive when the airfare and the cost of federally mandated Secret Service protection are taken into consideration.

When a presidential trip involves both official and political events, the White House is supposed to use a formula to determine the amount of money that the campaign or the party should reimburse to the Treasury Department to protect taxpayers from paying for any political activities. The formula generally is not made public.

July 29, 202002:53

A spokesperson for the Federal Election Commission said that to distinguish political travel from official travel, the White House should consider the purposes and the natures of the events at each stop.

According to FEC data, the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee have reimbursed more than $600,000 to the Treasury since May for airfare. Neither the Trump campaign nor the RNC provided NBC News with a breakdown of which trips taxpayers were reimbursed for.

Trump has also officially hosted a number of constituent-based events at the White House since the pandemic hit, involving truck drivers, farmers, veterans and seniors — a key voting bloc whose support for the president has slipped amid the pandemic. Five of the nearly two dozen events have been with faith leaders, a demographic that propelled Trump to victory in 2016 but whose support this time around has softened.

The campaign has pushed back against criticism that the president is misusing White House events.

“Democrats and the media are desperate to muzzle President Trump. They don’t want him tweeting, they don’t want him holding rallies, they don’t want him speaking at Mount Rushmore, and now they don’t want him holding press conferences,” said Tim Murtaugh, the campaign’s communications director. “Every week, Joe Biden reads speeches off the teleprompter attacking the president and the media gleefully reports every word, and President Trump is entitled to fight back.”

While there are some clear rules governing what sort of political activity the president can engage in on official trips and on the White House grounds (he cannot make fundraising calls from the Oval Office, for example), many of the president’s political actions are guided by tradition and norms.

The Hatch Act, a law limiting the political activities that federal employees can engage in to ensure that federal policies are carried out in a nonpartisan fashion and to protect federal workers from political coercion, does not apply to the president.

Officials from previous administrations say decoupling the political from the policy can be difficult, and many relied on White House lawyers, advisers and watchdogs to avoid Hatch Act and ethics violations.

“They were afraid of losing Congress, so they pushed the envelope on a bunch of things,” said Richard Painter, a Trump critic who was the chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, recalling the 2006 midterm elections, when he frequently had to push back on some actions by administration officials.

Still, said Greg Jenkins, who was Bush’s deputy assistant and director of White House advance, “we had a policy that drew a bright line between official and political events.”

“All White Houses do events at the White House that advocate or oppose particular policies or proposals. While those are done for political purposes — to persuade people to your side — they weren’t electioneering,” Jenkins said.

Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics

Johanna Maska, Obama’s White House director of press advance from 2009 to 2015, said she and other officials would get regular Hatch Act and ethics training from the White House counsel.

Maska said she recalled discussions during the 2012 campaign about whether using Obama’s official armored podium with the presidential seal at political events was an example of undue influence and a burden on taxpayers. Ultimately, the campaign decided to buy its own armored podium for Obama to use at events, which, Maska recalled, was expensive.

“Our typical default was we wanted to pay for everything to make sure we were following the law and weren’t making any in-kind contributions,” Maska said.

Eisen, the special counsel to Obama, said establishing a strict set of rules on the use of Air Force One and reimbursements, among other ethics issues, was a “huge priority” for the administration. “I personally trained everyone in the White House on these rules so they wouldn’t break them,” he said.

Eisen recalled telling Pete Rouse, a senior adviser to Obama who is an avid Grateful Dead fan, that he had to take down an Obama poster hanging in his office signed by the band because “there can be no taint of politics in this workplace, which is for policy.”

Government watchdogs say Trump has strayed far from the ethics norms of past administrations. They say he sets a dangerous precedent that could erode public trust.

“There are all sorts of debates, and the thing I was proud about is that our counsel would challenge us to make sure we were making the best decision for the taxpayers,” Maska said. “My question is: What is this counsel doing?”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Letter to the editor: In spite of all our best efforts, politics will always be messy – Summit Daily News

Published

on


Voyaging to the Pacific Northwest reopened my eyes to a continuous truth regarding U.S. political sentiments: that in spite of all our best efforts, politics will always be messy. Sometimes distressingly so. Regardless of anyone’s opinions of face masks or the political undercurrents therein, I witnessed shared sentiments that vary wildly merely across state lines. And what explains this? What social mechanisms produce these results? And what beliefs are fueled by them?

Though these questions and others like them are very deep, they are still very real. And it is worth noting with a generous helping of empathy that each of our neighbors holds unique faiths and ideologies. It is due to our differences that we all again stand — sometimes helplessly — in another social riptide.

The times we live in are scarcely normal, but that fact is scarcely new. There has barely been a year in our colorful past upon which the people felt stable and content. Uncertainty in our collective future has always meant that no particular ideal today is either perfectly endangered or impossible. The space between every election since 1776 has been marked by lurching social advances, a fierce ricochet we all experience between fear of losing all freedoms and triumph for achieving a country defined by freedom.

The point is that every big day has been won on the shoulders of bold endeavors by people with mud on their shoes and hope in their hearts. Solutions exist to our worst nightmares — violent injustice, social unrest, natural disasters, even extinction — and we shall find them. But the moral of the story is to endeavor together not stand apart. We’ve yet to face months of growing divisions in spite of our duties at hand, and we must ask ourselves, “To what end?”

As a Summit Daily News reader, you make our work possible.

Now more than ever, your financial support is critical to help us keep our communities informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having on our residents and businesses. Every contribution, no matter the size, will make a difference.

Your donation will be used exclusively to support quality, local journalism.

 

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Lessons from Lebanon: Disastrous consequences of sectarian politics – Economic Times

Published

on


By Santosh Paul

Lebanon, was the very epicenter of a rich multi religious and ethnically diverse society in the Middle East. As Edward Said put it, Lebanon was synonymous with “openness, diversity and the joy of life.” This spectacularly beautiful country, is the site of one of the oldest maritime cultures, the Phoenicans. Arabs, Turks, Kurds, Armenians, Europeans, North Africans and Levantines traded and thrived. A diverse religious communities of Maronite Christians, Greek Othodox Christians, Greek Catholics, Shi’ite and Sunni Muslims, the Druze (an offshoot of Shi’ite Islam) and Jews live here.

The Ottoman Turks conquered Lebanon in the 16th century. The syncretic civilization of Lebanon continued to flourish being part of the Ottoman Empire which had strong plural traditions. Lebanon fell to the French after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in the final throes of the First World War. The age old syncretic culture of Lebanon in due course found its voice in modern Lebanon. The foremost of them was the banker and intellectual Michel Chiha. He visualised the modern Lebanese state as a successor of the ancient merchant state of the Phoenicians. Lebanon represented the ‘heritage of ancient Phoenicia’ and the ‘broader Mediterranean heritage which they had once shared with Greece and Rome’.

In 1946, Lebanon became independent. What kept the peace between the communities was the National Pact of 1943. The Pact of 1943 was a complex arrangement of sharing of power between the various religious groups of Lebanon. Lebanon’s President would be a Maronite Christian, the premier a Sunni Muslim, the Speaker of the house would be a Shiite Muslim. What happened at the top was followed down the line ‘to the lowliest post in civil service’. Since Christians were marginally a majority, they were given a slightly higher representation within the chamber of deputies.

By proportional representation, the country sought to contain the sectarian tensions and to transform the remains of Ottoman Empire into a modern democracy. By the Pact of 1943, different communities were incorporated into becoming willing partners to nationhood. Despite its many critics Parliamentary elections went on unhindered from the time of independence right up to 1976. It was this Pact to which Lebanese returned to after the disastrous civil war.

PLURALISTIC LEBANON BECOMES THE ECONOMIC POWERHOUSE

Lebanon, in contrast to the rest of the Arab world took to modernization and western education very early. With peace amongst its religions and literacy levels at 73.5% – the highest in the developing world – Lebanon made a neat head start. With such high educational levels, it provided a highly trained manpower to the world markets. Lebanese working abroad sent foreign exchange remittances which formed the bulwark of the Lebanese economy. Lebanon with its dynamic economy enjoyed high growth rates, a large influx of foreign capital, and steadily rising per capita income. It became the bustling centre of commerce and culture in West Asia.

By the mid seventies, while the rest of the world economies were reeling under the OPEC induced rise in petrol prices, Lebanon’s economy began to peak. Lebanese Banks became the main source for channeling the petro dollar boom. The Lebanese banks were the repositories of the new found Arab wealth. In 1973, the GDP totaled 2.7 billion US $ which was twice its GDP in 1966. In 1974 in a quantum leap, the GDP rose to US$ 3.5 billion. The foreign banks made their way to Lebanon to partake in the wealth created there. It was but natural for the Lebanese Pound to gain ground against the US Dollar.

RISING SECTARIANISM COVERS UP INEQUALITIES NOT ADDRESSED

Behind this prosperity, lay the inequalities of income and wealth in the Lebanese society. A growing Left movement was driving home the point which mainstream politics constantly brushed aside. The problems of inequality were being effectively sidetracked and thwarted by the elites. To deflect the contentious issue of wealth distribution, the elites began resorting to ever increasingly strident denominational politics. Sectarianism in Lebanon in the seventies “was carefully promoted at its different stages by an emerging or an established elite interested in power”.

Sectarianism is a great distracter. The primary reason attributed to the increased sectarianism was because raising sectarian tensions divided the lower orders on communal lines and thereby diffused the demands made by them for greater share in the wealth created. In an essay ‘Lebanon’s Second Republic: ‘Secular Talk, Sectarian Application’, Sami A. Ofeish wrote:
“Thus the privileged elite usually emphasize stability and maintenance of the sectarian balance. In other words, they are interested in controlling the emerging tensions of the popular classes and guaranteeing themselves continuous access to resources. So popular attempts to challenge, modify, or abolish the sectarian system are usually blocked by the exploiting elite for the alleged sake of safeguarding the national interest (al-maslaha al-wataniyya) or national unity (al-wihda al-wataniyya”).

With the fast permeating denominational politics, the truce among religions collapsed in bits and parts under varying circumstances. The sectarianism promoted by the elites helped stem the appeals for more egalitarian socio economic policies. They also set in train the militarization of their respective sectarian cadres. The dominant Maronite Christian elite initiated a well-organized sectarian campaign designed to solidify their sectarian mass base and militarized cadres. Others followed suit.

BLACK SUNDAY AND THE BEGINNING OF CIVIL WAR

But all pent up animosities have an immediate provocation. Sunday, the 13th April 1975 will remain written in blood in the history of Lebanon. Sheik Gemayel Pierre, Christian Militia leader was attending the consecration of a new church. In an exchange of fire between Pierre’s Phalangist militia and unidentified gunmen, resulted in the death of 4 militiamen and his personal bodyguard. The very same morning Palestinian refugees were returning to their camp. Their bus was ambushed by gunmen who shot dead 27 unarmed passengers including women and children.

These two incidents precipitated the violence between the Christians and Muslims. The elites did nothing to nip the emanating violence in the bud. Instead, they further incited the sectarian passions. Beirut exploded into an orgy of violence with the Christian rightist guerillas and the Shi’ite-Druze alliance now in open conflict. With these signals, the religions of Lebanon and their armed militias soon took the field and this spectacular nation went into a civil war.

The fighting had ripped through the city. An imaginary green line ran through the centre of Beirut: the north of the line was under the control of the Christians and the south controlled by an axis of Druze-Muslims-Palestinians. Beirut’s famous hotels, where the rich and famous of the world partied, located close to the Green Line now became the battle ground for the warring factions. The Phoenicia, St. Georges, and Holiday Inn became fiercely contested militia strong holds earning the odium, ‘the battle of the hotels’ .

This strife in the financial capital of the middle east naturally had international ramifications and every major world power had stakes in Lebanon’s power struggle. Within a year, the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) was also drawn into this conflict. In the summer of 1976, Syria entered Lebanon to prevent a near certain defeat for the Christians. There were repeated Israeli raids and even a UN force was placed in the region. On 17th of July 1981, the Israelis bombed the PLO headquarters in West Beirut. A cease fire sponsored by the US again failed to bring about any rapprochement between the warring sides.

Another tragedy was to unfold on Lebanon, but this time the trigger went off in far away London. On 3rd June 1982, a Palestinian gunman named Hassan Said fired at the Israeli Ambassador Shlomo Argov in London. The assassin was not a member of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). He belonged to Yasser Arafat’s rival Abu Nidal’s Palestinian National Liberation Movement. But this vital information was concealed by the Israeli Prime Minister Mencham Begin from his cabinet. He ordered the invasion of Lebanon. The fight now escalated into an international conflict with every major power playing their part in this spiraling violence.

The Israeli army reaching Beirut they joined forces with the Phalangists and commenced the encirclement of West Beirut. They began indiscriminately bombing of residential areas of Beirut. The Israeli officers received instructions to attack Beirut’s Muslim quarters. Colonel Eli Geva whose column was to lead the assault on West Beirut asked himself to be relieved of his Brigade command and be exempted. Begin made a personal request to Geva. Geva refused to participate in a modern military war machine to be let loose against a defenseless civilian population.

But the assault on West Beirut commenced nevertheless and is probably one the most brutal episodes of modern warfare. The tanks pounded, crumbling the buildings and killing the ordinary citizens. The agony of the citizenry did not go unnoticed. ‘Soldiers Against Silence’ consisting of Israeli officers demanded an end to the war. The world watched impotently as Yitzhak Rabin ordered the closing of the water taps to the city of Beirut which was followed by relentless bombardment.

After the Israeli invasion, probably the cruelest pogrom in modern history took place which was to have repercussions after more than a quarter century later. On 15th September 1982 Israeli forces surrounded the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Chattila. It was “hermetically sealed”, to use the euphemistic expression of an Israeli general. On the night of September 16, 1982, Israeli military searchlights illuminated the two Palestinian refugee camps and simultaneously they allowed the Lebanese Christian Phalangist forces to enter the camps. Throughout the night flares lit up the sky. Till dawn only gunfire could be heard. By morning as the reporters moved in, they saw over 2300 bullet ridden bodies of Palestinian men, women and children. As if the killing alone was not brutal enough many of the bodies found were mutilated. This massacre was unparalled in human cruelty. These are deaths not mourned by historians writing from the capitals of the West. There are no monuments to kindle memories of this atrocity. There are no Spielberg’s to evoke our outrage. The powers which allowed this cruel drama to be played out are yet to be made accountable for.

ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF SECTARIANISM

As in all conflicts there was an economic price to be paid. The industry in Lebanon is estimated to have sustained direct damage valued at between L£5 and L£7 billion [ L£ means Lebanese Pounds]. Indirect damage to industry, trade and business could be between L£972 million and L£2.23 billion. One-fifth of industry’s fixed capital was lost. L£6.2 billion losses was sustained by the private sector alone. It is a strange irony that the commercial elites who funded the sectarian politics and strife had now to bear the burden.

Foreign banks which came into Lebanon to partake in the flush of petro dollars, were fleeing the beleaguered city. While Lebanese banks were flushed with funds during the petro dollar boom in the early seventies were now finding its deposits depleting.

This civil war witnessed infrastructural damage of monumental scales. Industry and commerce were paralyzed. The civil service was maintained only by deficit financing. The destructive power of the conflict can be visualized when one deals with the figures showing the destruction factories in the suburbs of Beirut, the connecting highways were torn up, close to 40,000 homes were destroyed. About one-fourth of all Beirut’s dwellings and eighty-five percent of all schools south of the city were damaged or destroyed.

The Lebanese Pound which had proudly risen against the dollar during the pre-civil war days was now taking a beating and hyperinflation set in. The period between 1983 to 1987 saw the rapid decline of the Lebanese Pound. Lebanese Pound collapsed against the dollar from 4 to 477 to the US dollar. By 1986 the inflation rate was well over 100 percent. Currency speculation and black marketeering became the principal areas of business activity. The militias began controlling the customs and other revenues gave them increasing control over what was left of the national economy.
From the beginning of the civil war in 1975 to the early 1990s, perhaps as many as 150,000 Lebanese died. About one-quarter of the country’s population fled abroad, and hundreds of thousands were forced to move from one part of Lebanon to another.

LEBANON ENDS THE CIVIL WAR GOING BACK TO THE CONSTITUION OF 1946
The war which commenced in 1975 had run for over decade and half with no discernible victory for either of the sides. The Lebanese were exhausted. The futitlity of the war, the savagery and the inconclusiveness made the various factions of Lebanese to accept peace on any terms. After 14 years of indecisive fighting, on October 22, 1989 most members of the Lebanese Parliament (last elected in 1972) met in Ta’if, Saudi Arabia. The agreement formed the principle of “mutual coexistence” between Lebanon’s different sects and their “proper political representation”. There, they accepted a constitutional arrangement that adjusted the Presidency, Cabinet, the Chamber of Deputies with representation of Christians and Muslims with the latter having a little more representation to match their population. But the irony is that this is how the country more or less ran prior to the civil war of 1975 under the Pact of 1943.

When Lebanon woke up from the civil war, it discovered that it had lost the basis of its prosperity. The civil war years were Lebanon’s lost years. The Arab money no longer needed the Lebanese. The Middle East’s businessmen dispensed with multi-lingual Lebanese middlemen. They had learnt to deal directly with Western banks and corporations. Lebanon was no longer the Arab world’s bazaar. West Asia had developed their own markets in the interregnum. Dubai, Riyad, Muscat, Doha and many other financial centres had bloomed in the interregnum.

THIS HISTORY OF SECTARIAN POLITICS IS NOT TAUGHT IN INDIA
This is a history rarely taught in India or for that matter in the subcontinent. The tragedy of discarding constitutions founded on secular values and soliciting sectarian ideologies, have scarred nations. For those willing, the lessons are closer to home. The prime examples of sectarian politics was visible in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Yet, it is hardly ever noticed and never ever studied. Constitutions in these countries came and went with new regimes promising religious utopia, but ended up destroying democratic institutions and snatching away human liberties and destroying the intricate fabric of syncretism.

Edward Said captured the need of the hour in his book ‘The End of the Peace Process’ he wrote:
Instead of getting a wise leadership that stresses education, mass mobilization, and patient organization in the service of a cause, the poor and the desperate are often conned into the magical thinking and quick, bloody solutions that such appalling models provide, wrapped in lying religious claptrap. …..We need to step back from the imaginary thresholds that supposedly separate people from each other into supposedly clashing civilizations and re-examine the labels, reconsider the limited resources available, and decide somehow to share our fates with each other, as in fact cultures mostly have done, despite the bellicose cries and creeds.

REFERENCES
1. Kamal Salibi A House of Many Mansions
2. A History of the 20th Century, Maritin Gilbert; Harper Collins
3. Sowing the Wind; The Mismanagement of the Middle East 1900-1960: John Keay . John Murray Publishers, 2003
4. Holy Lands: Reviving Pluralism in the Middle East by Nicholas Pelham’s; Columbia Global Reports New York 2016
5. Kamal Salibi: “A House of Many Mansions – The History of Lebanon Reconsidered” Published by I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd, 1993,
6. Lebanon’s Second Republic: Secular Talk, Sectarian Application, Arab Studies Quarterly (ASQ), Wntr, 1999 by Sami A. Ofeish.
7. Charles Glass: An Assassin’s Land; London Review of Books, 4 August 2005
8. Nehru talking under the auspices of Indian Conciliation Group on February 4, 1936 as cited in Essays by Jawaharlal Nehru; George Allen & Unwin Ltd. 1936.
9. Barakat, Halim, ed. 1988. Toward a Viable Lebanon. Washington, D.C.: Center for Contemporary Arab Studies; London: Croom Helm.
10. Chamie, Joseph. 1980. “Religious Groups in Lebanon: A Descriptive Investigation.” International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 2:175-87.
11. Elkhafif, Mahmoud A.T., M. H. Ghandour, and Atif A. Kubursi. 1992. “Explaining the Hyper-Depreciation of the Lebanese Pound.” QSEP Research Report 288. McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario.
12. Faris, Hani A. 1982. Beyond the Lebanese Civil War: Historical Issues and the Challenges of Reconstruction. Washington, D.C.: Center for Contemporary Arab Studies.
13. Farsoun, Samih K. 1988. “E Pluribus Plura or E Pluribus Unum? Cultural Pluralism and Social Class in Lebanon.” In Halim Barakat, ed., Toward a Viable Lebanon. Washington, D.C.: Center for Contemporary Arab Studies; London: Croom Helm. 99-132.
14. “The Economic and Social Factors in the Lebanese Crisis.” In Saad Eddin Ibrahim and Nicholas S. Hopkins, eds., Arab Society: Social Science Perspectives. Cairo: American University Press. 412-31.
15. Hourani, Albert H. 1988. “Visions of Lebanon.” In Halim Barakat. ed., Toward a Viable Lebanon. Washington, D.C.: Center for Contemporary Arab Studies; London: Croom Helm. 3-14.
16. Khalaf, Samir. 1987. Lebanon’s Predicament. New York: Columbia University Press.
17. Khalidi, Walid. 1979. Conflict and Violence in Lebanon: Confrontation in the Middle East. Harvard Studies in International Affairs 38. Cambridge, Mass.: Center for International Affairs, Harvard University.
18. Khashan, Hilal and M. Palmer. 1983. “The Economic Basis of the Civil Conflict in Lebanon: A Survey of Analysis of Sunnite Muslims.” In Tawfic E. Farah, ed., Political Behavior in the Arab States. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press. 67-81.
19. Khalaf, Samir. Civil and Uncivil Violence in Lebanon: a History of the Internationalization of Communal Conflict, Arab Studies Quarterly (ASQ), Summer, 2003
20. Love’s Lebanon lost – Beirut, Lebanon before the warNew Statesman, May 30, 1997 by Charles Glass.
21. Living the good life in Beirut US News & World Report, March 9, 1987 by John Barnes
22. Sectarianism And Business Associations In Postwar Lebanon
Arab Studies Quarterly (ASQ), Fall, 2000 by Sami E. Baroudi
23. The Merchant Republic of Lebanon: Rise of an Open Economy. By Carolyn L. Gates. (Oxford: Center for Lebanese Studies, in association with I.B. Tauris Publishers, London and New York, 1998.)

(The writer is senior advocate, Supreme Court)

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author’s own.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending