Posts Tagged ‘AP’

Proportionality and Collective Punishment

Saturday, August 29th, 2009
A Gazan tunnel in Rafah

A Palestinian tunnel digger in Rafah.

The AP is reporting that an Israeli airstrike killed 3 Palestinians and wounded 7 others inside a smuggling tunnel between Gaza and Egypt, according to a Palestinian Health Ministry official.

The Israeli military said the strike was in retaliation for a mortar attack from Gaza on Monday that lightly wounded an Israeli soldier.

The tunnels are the only way for Palestinians to bring in fuel and other goods (e.g., live animals for fresh meat) because of the Israeli blockade of Gaza. It is rumored that Hamas maintains its own, secret tunnels for importing arms, including the mortars and rockets used to attack Israel. The AP doesn’t specify what exactly these smugglers were doing; however, to my knowledge the Palestinian Health Ministry is not run by Hamas,  therefore the official’s involvement points to civilian smugglers. This is clearly a point requiring more reporting, so take that nugget with a lump of salt.

If the Palestinians were indeed civilians, this is truly beyond the pale. Even if they were militants, the proportionality is both disturbing and telling. The math reads like this:

Wounding an Israeli = Wounding seven Palestinians

If the math stopped there, it would be hard to justify. But to kill 3 additional Palestinians? Taken together, this one incident does a lot to reinforce and instill the perception that Israel does not consider Palestinians to be fellow humans. It also gives Palestinians little cause to extend the same consideration to Israelis. With air strikes like these, Israel does not help itself to reach a negotiable peace.

One of the more uncomfortable aspects of Quentin Tarantino’s latest bloodbath of a movie (Inglourious Basterds) is the unquestioning use of collective punishment. I am most definitely not going to argue that the Nazis were good, wholesome folks; but I think it’s safe to say that not every soldier was a Goebbels, or even an Eichmann, for that matter.

The use of collective punishment, for the people of Gaza, is tangentially related. Except in this example, rather than being soldiers of a nation perpetuating mass genocide, the people of Gaza are civilians–punished by the blockade for the sins of a few.

The mystery of the Arctic Sea is resolved. Yet, it continues.

Thursday, August 20th, 2009
Crew members of the Arctic Sea deplaning just outside Moscow (Russia TV)

Crew members of the Arctic Sea deplaning just outside Moscow (Russia TV)

I apologize if you’re getting tired of this story, but I find it endlessly fascinating. Piracy in Europe! (Pirates, outside of Africa and Asia?!) A resurgent Russia’s military might! For initiates, here’s a timeline from the AP of the events. So what’s happened since the last post?

Yesterday, the Russian spokesman for their defense ministry said that the pirates/hijackers (initially identified as Swedish police searching for drugs) had threatened to shoot the crew and sink the boat unless a $1.5 million ransom was paid. The boat’s insurer confirmed the story. The Russians arrested the 8 hijackers without firing a shot this week off of Cape Verde, three weeks after the ship had disappeared.

The AP article leaves off with a series of unanswered questions:

Why would the hijackers seize a small freighter carrying only about $2 million in timber? Were the hijackers actually seeking something of greater value, drugs, weapons or nuclear materials, perhaps? Why was it first reported that the hijackers had boarded the vessel in the Baltic Sea, bound and beaten the crew and then left?

The last question seems to have been resolved: the hijackers actually had stayed aboard, and had the crew report that eveything was fine when the ship traversed the straits of Dover.

The Financial Times threw a little more reporting into their story:

But the little information released by Russia so far has failed to convince many skeptics and speculation continued to swirl on Wednesday that the ship, which ostensibly was carrying €1.3m worth of timber, may have been carrying a secret cargo.

A former commander of the Estonian defence force, Tarmo Kouts, said in an article published Wednesday that the heavy contingent of naval vessels Russia sent to track down the ship indicated the Arctic Sea may have been involved in arms trafficking. “Only the presence of cruise missiles on board the ship can explain Russia’s strange behaviour in this whole story,” Mr Kouts said in Wednesday’s Postimees. Mr Kouts said the three battleships and one frigate Russia sent to find the ship was a much stronger naval unit than those involved in combating pirates off the coast of Somalia.

An executive at the Finland-based company that owned the vessel, Solchart, told the FT on Tuesday that “anything was possible”. Speaking on condition of anonymity, he said that a secret cargo may have been the target of the hijackers and may have been hidden on the ship when it anchored in Kaliningrad for repairs before it sailed for Finland where it was loaded with timber.

This may help explain the fairly extensive Russian involvement, especially in attacking the ship and freeing a crew, sailing under the flag of Malta. Granted, an Estonian talking about Russia would not necessarily want to show Russia in the kindest light. To throw some more speculative wood onto the fire, this may simply be about Russia showing its extended reach, flexing its naval muscles a bit. It’s not just the U.S. that can take down pirates, this seems to say. The FT piece ends with a more mundane answer:

One Russian businessman with knowledge of the shipping business said indications were growing that part of the ship’s 15 man crew may have conspired with the gang of eight men to seize the ship in effort to squeeze funds out of the ship’s owners.

Perfectly logical. And yet, the Kremlin has been so outspoken about the seizure. Russia is definitely milking this event for what its worth. Would I go so far as to say that this could be a PR stunt for Russian military might? No. But as the executive from the shipping company said, “anything is possible.”

(HT: Tom Dolan)

John McCain & Co. get all mavericky in Yemen

Monday, August 17th, 2009
Straight reppin' the Naval Academy. (SABA)

Straight reppin' the Naval Academy. (SABA)

The AP reports that a US senatorial delegation, led by Sen. McCain, is meeting with President Ali Abdullah Saleh in Yemen today. Think of the trip as McCain & Friends’ August vacation:

The American delegation has been on a Mideast trip since last week and has already made stops in Libya and Iraq. It also includes Senators Joseph Lieberman, Susan Collins and Lindsey Graham.

The gang’s all there! According to McCain’s spokeswoman, they’ll be getting down to business: counterrorism and the return of the remaining Yemeni Guantanamo detainees (who comprise about half of the remaining detainees).

After reading a small amount of press coverage on Yemen, it’s shocking to see how many times this one particular phrase comes up:

The country, which is the ancestral homeland of Osama bin Laden, has been the site of numerous high-profile, al-Qaida-linked attacks, including the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in the Gulf of Aden, which killed 17 American sailors.

“The ancestral homeland of Osama bin Laden.” This sentence seems pretty much required in any piece on Yemen.

That’d be kind of like every time we run a story about Ireland, we have to read that it was “the ancestral homeland of Timothy McVeigh.”

(HT: Waq al-Waq)

Shepherd Fairey v. the AP

Tuesday, February 17th, 2009

What began as a dispute over the source of Fairey’s unofficial Obama campaign poster has turned into a showdown over “fair-use,” the wikipedia-inflamed ability to engage in rifacimento–remixing, rebranding, but above all, reposting and sharing it again. But not for commercial gain, no never!

Ripped straight from the copyright law of 1976:

The fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
  2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
  3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
  4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

This balancing test actually involves some pretty complex case law behind (and dancing around) each of the factors. Nothing is as at seems! But let me be the judge.

1. Intended for non-profit use, not commercial (adv. Fairey)
2. Copyrighted hardcore (adv. AP)
3. I think this is where the answer lies. How much of the original photo remains? To my mind, it was completely transformed, from the mundane to a work of art (adv. Fairey)
4. If anything, this made people comb the AP archives to try to find the original photo. I can’t see how this would reduce the value of the original; if anything, it would increase it (adv. Fairey)

O dear readers, what say you?