Somali Pirates Take American Ship: Crew Takes it Back

Short version: The American container ship container ship Maersk Alabama was hijacked by Somali pirates. Then the Maersk Alabama's crew took the ship back. At least one of the crew is missing, taken by retreating pirates.

Someone from the Defense Department said that the Captain of the Maersk Alabama seems to be on a lifeboat, with four pirates.

I sincerely hope that the captain gets back to civilization safely.

Civilized Places, Not-So-Civilized Places, and Somalia

Using the word "civilization" in that context sounds terribly intolerant, biased, judgmental, and all that: But I'm not in college any more, and don't have to use newspeak any more. I can acknowledge that there are civilized places in the world, where there are laws that conform, to some extent, to international standards: and that Somalia isn't one of those places.

I'm not criticizing Somalis, or their culture: but let's be realistic. In practical terms, although they've got a president there isn't a Somali government, and the territory's a mess. Also a home to pirates.

Let's be Open Minded, Not Empty Headed

"Don't be so open-minded that your brain falls out" is a phrase I ran across decades ago: and it's as apropos now as it was then. 'Knee jerk' anything is a problem: whether it's 'real Americans' who think those foreigners should go back where they came from; or people who think that some foreigners are right because they're not westerners.

American isn't always right: but it isn't always wrong, either.

---

Update:
"American Authorities to Somali Pirates: 'We Want to Talk - "
(April 9, 2009)

---

Related posts:

• "Sounds of Silence: 2009"
  (March 31, 2009)
• "The West and Today's Somali President: The Enemy of Your Enemy is Your Friend?"
  (March 19, 2009)
• "Al Shabaab May Be Running Somalia Now: Just What We Need"
  (January 26, 2009)
• "America to Unilaterally Attack Somalia!"
  (January 8, 2009)
• "Guinea, Military Rule, and Terrorism: Beware Hasty Judgment"
  (December 29, 2008)

In the news:

• "For young Somalis, piracy offers power, prosperity"
  The Associated Press (April 8, 2009)
• "US captain held hostage by pirates as crew regain ship "
  telegraph.co.uk (April 8, 2009)
• "Drama as US crew recapture vessel"
  BBC (April 8, 2009)
• "U.S. Crew Regain Control of Hijacked Ship as Pirates Hold Captain"
  FOXNews (April 8, 2009)

Pakistan; Nawaz Sharif; Multiculturalism; and a Skewed World View

Today, Pakistani politics is making the last Minnesota Senatorial election look good. Here in the frozen north, we're still waiting for the courts to decide whose vote counts and whose doesn't.

Politics, Pakistani Style: Somebody Speaking Against You? Lock Him Up!

And, while you're at it, lock up some of his supporters.

In my youth, the more rabid right-wingers sometimes expressed the wish that anybody protesting the government should be locked up, or sent back where they came from. In Pakistan, that dream is close to reality.

Pakistan's main opposition leader Nawaz Sharif used to be Pakistan's prime minister, but now he's just leader of one of the Pakistan Muslim Leagues. (At last count, there were the Pakistan Muslim League-Functional, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz Sharif, and the Pakistan Muslim League - guess which one Mr. Sharif runs?)

Nawaz Sharif isn't an ally of the current boss of Pakistan. And, until quite recently, he was under house arrest.

I have no doubt that I'm missing quite a few of the subtleties of Pakistani politics and culture here, but the bottom line is that

• Someone who doesn't entirely approve of the guy in charge was under house arrest
• His supporters were peeved about that
  • So was he, apparently
• They've started rioting
• He's joined them

I realize that there are quite a few ways of running a country: but Pakistan's approach doesn't seem to be working very well. People who are satisfied with the way things are don't, as a rule, throw smoking tear gas canisters back at riot police.

Pakistan and the Open Mind

A little over 13 hours ago, an op-ed by Jason Burke started with these words:

"Our skewed world view won't let us see the real Pakistan"
"Jason Burke
"The Observer [via guardian.co.uk], Sunday 15 March 2009

"First for the good news: Pakistan is not about to explode. The Islamic militants are not going to take power tomorrow; the nuclear weapons are not about to be trafficked to al-Qaida; the army is not about to send the Afghan Taliban to invade India; a civil war is unlikely.

"The bad news is that Pakistan poses us questions that are much more profound than those we would face if this nation of 170m, the world's second biggest Muslim state, were simply a failed state. If Pakistan collapsed, we would be faced by a serious security challenge. But the resilience of Pakistan and the nation's continuing collective refusal to do what the west would like it to together pose questions with implications far beyond simple security concerns. They are about our ability to influence events in far-off places, our capacity to analyse and understand the behaviour and perceived interests of other nations and cultures, about our ability to deal with difference, about how we see the world....

My guess is that Mr. Burke's op-ed got out before today's news from Lahore, Pakistan, filtered through. Or, that he didn't have time for any re-writes.



Mr. Burke isn't unceasingly praiseful toward Pakistan. He points out that "Some of the perpetual international hysteria is stoked by the Pakistanis themselves. Successive governments have perfected the art of negotiating by pointing a gun to their own heads...."

On the other hand, his article reminds me of the sort of daft multiculturalism I had to learn, back in the eighties.

My Ways, Your Ways, and Ways that Work

Jason Burke's op-ed was probably written with the British public in mind: It's a guardian.co.uk repost of something the Observer published. On the other hand, he does refer to "the west," so he probably also had America in mind, as well as the Brits and Europe.

My Way or the Highway?

These days, with information technology making terms like "global village" less of an oxymoron than it once was, it's important to remember that people are different: at individual, family, community, regional, and cultural levels. And, that not everybody either is, or should be, alike.

Readers of this blog live all over the world: About two thirds are in America, roughly five percent are in India. People with Internet connections in either the United Kingdom, Canada, or Australia make up about another 12 percent. Besides America, people in 140 countries, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, drop by from time to time.

The point is that these days, there's more to your world than the people in your area.

And, within limits, cultures that aren't your own should be respected.

The stereotype Britisher, who regards the world as made up, in sharply descending order, of respectable English gentlemen, persons who aren't gentlemen but are still British, European foreigners, non-European foreigners, and the Irish, is probably just that: a stereotype.

But, one with some basis in fact.

I don't have any problem with a citizen of the United Kingdom having a decided preference for the British way of getting things done. People everywhere should think that their ways are 'best.' Which, if they're doing things right, they are: for them.

I'm an American. I think we've got a pretty good system of governing ourselves, doing business (I don't mean the the anachronistic nitwits at AIG, GM, Chrysler and Ford - think Bill Gates, Sam Walton, and Steve Jobs), and helping each other in hard times (I know: Bush refused to invade Louisiana - I'm thinking of truckers and contractors who sent supplies into post-hurricane Florida and Louisiana).

The "American way" works pretty well. For Americans. That's not just my opinion: quite a number of people vote with their feet, moving to America from all over the world.

But, it's not the only way of running a country.

Truth, Justice, and the [your region] Way

I think humanity would lose a great deal if cultural distinctions disappeared. And, closer to the topic of this blog, I am not at all convinced that "democracy" as imagined by Americans is the one, true, and correct, form of government for all people and all time.

I do think that a responsive, responsible, government is needed everywhere, but details like whether the leaders are selected by elections, civil service exams, or heredity, are just that: details. What's important is that "the government do the right thing by the governed." (A Catholic Citizen in America (March 14, 2009))

Difference is Okay: But "Different" Doesn't Mean "Good"

I implied, in another blog, that I don't expect everybody to be exactly like me. I think it's great that the entire world isn't like Georgia, or Minnesota, or New York City, or San Francisco, or Bemidji.

Accepting Diversity and Locking Up People Who Don't Agree With You

I hope that Mr. Burke is right, and that Pakistan's abdication of authority in the Swat Valley, harboring (willingly or not) of LeT terrorists, and habit of locking up people who don't agree with whoever says he's president at the moment, aren't indications that the territory we call Pakistan is going to join the list of areas that need to be cleaned up.

I think that reading Mr. Burke's op-ed is a good idea. He seems to have some knowledge of Pakistan and how it works. However, I also think that it's well to realize that 'non-Western' isn't necessarily 'good' or 'functional.' And, that 'Western' isn't 'bad' or 'oppressive.' And, no: Mr. Burke doesn't use the term "oppressive."

The first person to comment on Mr. Burke's column, Zarak, did:

"One sees the thoughts and influences of Imran Khan in this article, who now a days is carrying himself as one of the authorities on the current Pakistan's Islamic phenomenon. The fact is that Pakistan is a complete mess with a powerful Punjab that is trying to run the state in an imperial manner and using fundamentalism/militant Islam to control peripheral nationalism of Pashtuns and grabbing territory in the west (Afghanistan) and the east (Kashmir)...

"...The author's knowledge of Pakistan nationalism is also superficial. There is no strong feelings of nationhood in the citzens of Pakistan. They are either Punjabis, Sindhis, Baluchis, Pashtuns, Siraikis, etc...."

Zarak may be biased about the "the oppressive rule of Punjab's military elite" - but I'm afraid that he may have a point, about the Pakistani-on-the-street's attitude toward Pakistan as a nation.

The idealism of Mr. Burke is admirable. However, I think it's prudent to consider that locking up the leader of an opposition party, together with some of his supporters - and leaving enough supports running around loose to start at least one riot - may not be the mark of a well-functioning government. No matter how non-Western it is.

More-or-less related posts:

• "Pakistan: Cricket Fans Not Pleased"
  (March 4, 2009)
• "Turkey, the Ottoman Empire, Dead Armenians, and Learning from Mistakes"
  (February 28, 2009)
• "Taliban Brings Peace, Islamic Law, to Pakistan's Swat Valley"
  (February 21, 2009)
• "Pakistan, the Taliban, and Peace Through Diplomacy"
  (February 17, 2009)
• "India, Mumbai, and the Pakistan Connection: Following Facts"
  (December 31, 2008)
• "Pakistan, India, Mumbai, Nuclear Weapons, and Pashtunistan: Simple This Isn't"
  (December 27, 2008)

News and views:

• "Police and Protesters Clash in Pakistan"
  The New York Times (March 16, 2009)
• "Pakistan to reinstate chief justice"
  CNN (March 15, 2009)
• "In pictures: Pakistan protests"
  BBC (March 15, 2009)
• "Pakistan diary: City on knife edge "
  Al Jazeera (March 15, 2009)
• "Pakistan ex-PM Sharif defies house arrest"
  Radio Netherlands Worldwide (March 15, 2009)
• "Our skewed world view won't let us see the real Pakistan"
  The Observer via guardian.co.uk (March 15, 2009)
• "Understanding Pakistan's latest turmoil"
  CNN (March 14, 2009)
• "Pakistan 'blocks' critical TV station"
  CNN (March 14, 2009)
• "Opposition leader ban sparks Pakistan protests"
  CNN (February 26, 2009)

Background:

• Imran Kahn
  • "Tehrik-i-Insaf"
    GlobalSecurity.org
  • "Benazir Bhutto"
    GlobalSecurity.org

Wal-Mart, a Muslim Woman's Veil, and a Really Rude Clerk

And CAIR (The Council on American-Islamic Relations). This time, I think that somewhat jumpy¹ civil-rights outfit had a point.

CAIR says that a Muslim woman, wearing a face veil, went through a checkout counter at a Wal-Mart store in Riverdale, Utah, on February 2, 2008.

The cashier at that counter said: "Please don't stick me up," according to The Council on American-Islamic Relations, anyway.

They could be right. Wal-Mart seems to think so. Wal-Mart's regional general manager, Rolando Rodriquez, signed a letter of apology and sent it to CAIR on Monday of this week. The Nevada chapter of CAIR released the letter yesterday.

The clerk will be subjected to "sensitivity training," and CAIR seems to be satisfied.

So am I, although

1. What I think about the matter doesn't make a whit of practical difference.
2. "Sensitivity training" is something of a hot-button phrase for me

The "sensitivity training" I know about is the eighties-style indoctrination in politically correct attitudes toward men and other undesirable types, but it may have changed in the last twenty years.

Although I've stood behind enough cash registers to know how unsettling a customer covered face can be, you don't treat a customer like that.

Not more than once, in my day. A stunt like that would have gotten me fired. On the spot, if the manager had been within earshot. If I was very lucky, I might have been re-assigned to the stockroom.

There's no reasonable doubt that some Muslims have decided that Allah is telling them to kill infidels (or "kafir," to be more 'multicultural').

That doesn't mean that everyone who wears clothing that doesn't match the dress code we've been used to is a thug, or a terrorist. Some may be weirdos, but that's an entirely different topic.

People from Somalia have been moving to central Minnesota lately: mostly in St. Cloud, for now. It's only a matter of time until Sauk Centre, the town I live in, has Somali families living here. When that happens, I'm hoping that we'll get another couple shelves of specialty foods in the grocery.

There's a near-certainty that someone will do something insulting here. There are jerks everywhere.

My hope is that people who are on the brink of jerkishness will get a grip, and accept that not everyone is just like them.

Related posts, on tolerance, bigotry, racism, and hatred.

---

¹ "Hypersensitive" might be a more accurate term. CAIR hasn't been in the news lately, though, so they may have reviewed their policy, which seemed to be that any arrest, or perceive insult, of a Muslim - or Muslimah, for that matter - was a hate crime.

Britain's Separate-But-Equal Treatment of Islam: Is the Idea Better? Or Batty?

That was Then

"We can learn so much from Europe/England/Denmark" was a common attitude when I grew up. At least, in the academic sub-culture I lived in. The phrase, "we can learn so much from...." was actually used sometimes. The idea was that all the best ideas were from

• Europe in general, because of all that 'culture'
• England, because of their socialized medicine
• Denmark, because that country had legalized prostitution
  (thereby showing how open-minded and uninhibited they were)

'We can learn so much Sweden' was on the list, until word got out that the country was a world leader in suicide rates.

This is Now

We can learn so much from England: like how to promote humanism, multiculturalism, and, probably, terrorism.

That's what the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) said in a report yesterday.

There's probably still something to learn from England's well-intentioned effort to make minorities feel at home by exempting them from the rules that Britons had to follow, and letting them (forcing them?) to set up ghettos, where they could do things their way: 'Don't do it!'

The United Kingdom's experiment with a 'separate-but-equal' approach to distinctions between people isn't going too well. That should be no surprise. Remember how well "separate but equal" worked in America?

An "International Herald Tribune" article had interview extracts from one of the RUSI report's authors, Gwyn Prins, including these quotes:

• "One reason that the United States does not suffer from homegrown terrorism is that it is the world's melting pot, where immigrants are Americans, salute the flag, and obey the constitution and the law."
• "The U.K. should have the self-confidence to do the same, but we don't."
• "We don't insist they learn English, that they fully and properly integrate into our society as a whole. So we have these ghetto societies where Islamist extremists can create a narrative of resentment and recruitment."

Prins is a specialist on international security at the London School of Economics. He's also good at pressing all the wrong buttons, at least for people in some circles.

• "The safety and security of our citizens is the government's main priority and the government rejects any suggestion that Britain is a soft touch for terrorists."
  Prime Minister Gordon Brown's government

Britain's current Prime Minister is unquestionably aware that terrorism is an issue for the United Kingdom. The wisdom of his approach to the situation may be debatable. Last July, for example, he forbade government ministers from using the word "Muslim" and told his team to drop the phrase "war on terror."

I've got nit-picking problems with what the RUSI report writer said.

• "Melting pot," for example, isn't a good metaphor for America. I've traveled around enough to know that there are very distinct regional and ethnic cultures here. "Crazy quilt" might be a better way to describe what we've got.
• Saying that "the United States does not suffer from homegrown terrorism" is simply wrong. From the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, to a mosque-burning in Tennessee, America has had home-grown terrorists. The American terrorists, though, generally are people who don't like this country's habit of welcoming non-WASPs.

On the whole, though, I think that the British think tank identified an important point.

People moving to another country should expect to meet some qualifications. For example, I'd expect to learn German, if I decided to live in German, and expect that I'd have to learn German customs and obey German laws if I became a citizen there. In fact, I'd be a little disturbed if I found that I had to live in the "American quarter" of Düsseldorf, or some other area, and had "leaders" who discouraged me from learning German. I'm not talking about American military bases, with their transient populations, but what happens with individual immigrants.

That's not to say that ethnic neighborhoods are wrong: it's natural for people with preferences for, say, garlic or lutefisk to settle near each other.

But trying to be "multicultural" by allowing select groups to set up independent legal systems, and then maintaining de facto barriers to keep members of that group from getting jobs outside the ghetto, is crazy. It hasn't worked before, and I'd be astonished if it worked now.

---

More, about the RUSI report: Study criticizes UK's vulnerability to Islamic extremists "International Herald Tribune" (February 15, 2008)

Selected "Another War-on-Terror" posts about the 2007 Glasgow/London attacks in the United Kingdom:
"Arrests, Doctors and Terrorists: Keeping a Cool Head"
(July 2, 2007)
"Doublethink, Doctors, and Dumb Ideas"
(July 3, 2007)

The Middle East, Princess Di, and the Fayeds: a Multicultural Perspective

In London, an inquest into the death of Princess Diana is in the news.

This has nothing to do, directly, with the war on terror, but I think there's a lesson to be learned here.

A little over ten years ago, Princess Di, her very special friend Dodi Fayed, Fayed's bodyguard, and a sozzled driver shot into a tunnel, along with a swarm of paparazzi. In the tunnel, the car met a concrete pillar, with predictable results. Dodi's bodyguard survived, happily, but Dodi, Di, and the driver were sincerely dead.

Dodi's dad, Mohammed al Fayed, says that Queen Elizabeth II's husband, Prince Philip, told the British secret service to kill Dodi and Di. Even assuming that the elder Fayed is right about his son having gotten Di pregnant, and the British Royal family not wanting a non-Britisher in the family, the assassination angle seems unlikely.

Until you realize that Mohammed al Fayed is from Egypt.

That's a part of the world that reminds me, in some ways, of gangland Chicago. Back around the 11th century, a group of Islamic Persians permanently removed people they didn't approve of: and gave European cultures the word الحشاشين (hashashin) in the process. It came into English as "assassin."

It's easy to get the idea that people in and near today's Middle East are accustomed to settling differences by selective, and occasionally not-so-selective, assassinations. For example,

• Two aides of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, Iraq's top Shiite cleric, were assassinated within hours of each other last month. It could be part of a Shiite turf war.
• A couple years ago, former Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri, and quite a few others, died when the convoy he was in blew up. His Majesty King Abdullah II of Jordan strongly condemned" the assassination. Odds are that Syria ordered the hit.

Coming from a region like that, the first thing a bereaved father might think of was that the family of his son's girlfriend had put out a hit.

Sure, it killed Di, too: but honor killings aren't exactly unknown around there, either. Di had, from some points of view, besmirched the family's honor and needed to be killed.

So what? Non-Muslims are dealing with a part of the world, and a culture, that most of us aren't used to. Aside from relatively minor details, like table etiquette, there are major points where people who grew up in a post-Magna-Carta world must remember that other cultures have alternative values.

For example, in America, a woman who was raped is generally regarded as a victim.

In other places, from Syria to Pakistan, a woman who was raped has brought shame to her family, and must be killed to wipe out the shame.

Although I can't condone honor killings and assassinations, I think it's necessary to understand how other cultures deal with conflicts and other issues, in order to properly evaluate how well, or how poorly, political leaders in that part of the world maintain order.

In other words, Baghdad, Damascus, and Riyadh are not Kansas City, Detroit, and Miami.

Back to the Princess Di mess for a moment. As a father myself, I sympathize with Muhammed al Fayed. The loss of a child is a terrible thing, and I grieve with him.

Although I believe that al Fayed has misread British culture, and over-estimated the abilities of the British secret service, It's only reasonable to provide a link to "Al Fayed," Muhammed al Fayed's website.