8.20.06 Pt. II: Marshall Plan

If the U.S. and UK wanted to win the hearts and minds in the Middle East they might think of giving out reconstruction money, as Hezbollah is doing, to families whose houses and businesses have been destroyed. The West might think of offering these reparations and aid to both sides — the destruction in Israel was minor, but is still devastating for those involved. The southern Lebanese know that the U.S. sold cluster bombs and missiles to Israel during this time, so to them all the talk of democracy looks like a scam, a front for arms trading and arms testing, as revealed in a recent New Yorker article. As it is, the conventional wisdom in the area is that Hezbollah cares — they will defend the villages and aid the families whose homes were destroyed and whose family members were killed. If this aid, this care, came from elsewhere, the loyalties of the recipients might not be as polarized now and in the future. The Lebanese government might not be as reticent to condemn and limit the influence of Hezbollah if there were other aid societies. For many urban communities it is the Mob or the local drug dealers who hand out small business loans and help families in need — so no wonder the eradication of these institutions is impossible.

From a purely pragmatic and self-interested point of view, when you help create a self-sufficient economy, a solid society, from the ruins of war, you create a future trading partner. When you punish and point fingers, when you continue to fund dictators and corrupt politicians, you create future enemies. Ditto with prisoners — not just in Gitmo and the various hidden branches of the American Gulag, but the regular old prisons as well — punishment, however emotionally satisfying to the one administering it, ultimately creates more desperation, alienation and future prisoners. Good for the prison industry, bad for the rest of us.

Here they call it terrorangst.

We pass a large graffiti tag on a bridge, the name is Chintz.