Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Thursday, December 29, 2016

White House: Bibi a liar


Israel’s Netanyahu Castigates Obama as a Backstabber and Betrayer
by Patrick Buchanan-Dec 28, 2016
( December 28, 2016, Boston, Sri Lanka Guardian) Did the community organizer from Harvard Law just deliver some personal payback to the IDF commando? So it would seem.
By abstaining on that Security Council resolution declaring Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem illegal and invalid, raged Bibi Netanyahu, President Obama “failed to protect Israel in this gang-up at the UN, and colluded with it.”
Obama’s people, charged Bibi, “initiated this resolution, stood behind it, coordinated on the wording and demanded that it be passed.”
White House aide Ben Rhodes calls the charges “falsehoods.”
Hence, we have an Israeli leader all but castigating an American president as a backstabber and betrayer, while the White House calls Bibi a liar.
This is not an unserious matter.
“By standing with the sworn enemies of Israel to enable the passage of this destructive, one-sided anti-Israel rant and tirade,” writes the Washington Times, “Mr. Obama shows his colors.”
But unfortunately for Israel, the blow was delivered by friends as well as “sworn enemies.”
The U.S. abstained, but Britain, whose Balfour Declaration of 1917 led to the Jewish state in Palestine, voted for the resolution.
As did France, which allied with Israel in the Sinai-Suez campaign of 1956 to oust Egypt’s Col. Nasser, and whose Mysteres were indispensable to Israel’s victory in the Six-Day War of 1967.
Vladimir Putin, who has worked with Bibi and was rewarded with Israel’s refusal to support sanctions on Russia for Crimea and Ukraine, also voted for the resolution.
Egypt, whose Gen. Abdel Fattah el-Sisi was welcomed by Bibi after his coup against the Muslim Brotherhood president, and who has collaborated with Bibi against terrorists in Sinai and Gaza, also voted yes.
China voted yes as did Ukraine. New Zealand and Senegal, both of which have embassies in Tel Aviv, introduced the resolution.
Despite Israel’s confidential but deepening ties with Sunni Arab states that share her fear and loathing of Iran, not a single Security Council member stood by her and voted against condemning Israel’s presence in Arab East Jerusalem and the Old City. Had the resolution gone before the General Assembly, support would have been close to unanimous.
While this changes exactly nothing on the ground in the West Bank or East Jerusalem where 600,000 Israelis now reside, it will have consequences, and few of them will be positive for Israel.
The resolution will stimulate and strengthen the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel, which has broad support among U.S. college students, Bernie Sanders Democrats and the international left.
If Israel does not cease expanding West Bank settlements, she could be hauled before the International Criminal Court and charged with war crimes.
Already, J Street, the liberal Jewish lobby that backs a two-state solution in Palestine – and has been denounced by Donald Trump’s new envoy to Israel David Friedman as “far worse than kapos,” the Jewish guards at Nazi concentration camps – has endorsed the resolution.
The successful resolution is also a reflection of eroding support for Israel at the top of the Democratic Party, as a two-term president and a presidential nominee, Secretary of State John Kerry, were both behind it.
Republicans are moving to exploit the opening by denouncing the resolution and the U.N. and showing solidarity with Israel. Goal: Replace the Democratic Party as the most reliable ally of Israel, and reap the rewards of an historic transfer of Jewish political allegiance.
That Sen. George McGovern was seen as pro-Palestinian enabled Richard Nixon to double his Jewish support between 1968 and 1972.
That Jimmy Carter was seen as cold to Israel enabled Ronald Reagan to capture more than a third of the Jewish vote in 1980, on his way to a 44-state landslide.
Moreover, U.S. acquiescence in this resolution puts Bibi in a box at home. Though seen here as a hawk on the settlements issue, the right wing of Bibi’s coalition is far more hawkish, pushing for outright annexation of West Bank settlements. Others call for a repudiation of Oslo and the idea of an independent Palestinian state.
If Bibi halts settlement building on the West Bank, he could cause a split in his Cabinet with rightist rivals like Naftali Bennett who seek to replace him.
Here in the U.S., the U.N. resolution is seen by Democrats as a political debacle, and by many Trump Republicans as an opportunity.
Sen. Chuck Schumer has denounced Obama’s refusal to veto the resolution, echoing sentiments about the world body one used to hear on America’s far right.
“The U.N.” said Schumer, “has been a fervently anti-Israel body since the days (it said) ‘Zionism is racism’ and that fervor has never diminished.”
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham says he will urge Congress to slash funding for the United Nations.
If the folks over at the John Birch Society still have some of those bumper stickers – “Get the U.S. out of the U.N., and the U.N. out of the U.S.!” they might FedEx a batch over to Schumer and Graham.
May have some converts here.

Pat Buchanan has been a senior adviser to three presidents, twice a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination and the presidential nominee of the Reform Party in 2000.

Syria ceasefire: Army to halt operations at 'zero hour' on Thursday night


Moscow has announced a 'reduction' of its forces in Syria ahead of truce overseen by Turkey and Russia as bombing continues on the ground

Workers start the clean-up after a Syrian government advance in the city of Aleppo (AFP)

Thursday 29 December 2016
A ceasefire deal in Syria brokered by Russia and Turkey will come into effect at midnight local time on Thursday, Moscow said, announcing a "reduction" in the numbers of Russian forces on the ground in Syria.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Thursday said the planned ceasefire for Syria was a "historic opportunity" to end the nearly six year Syrian conflict, saying it was a chance that could not be wasted.
"This chance absolutely should not be lost. This a historic opportunity," he told a news conference in Ankara alongside Kosovo President Hashim Thaci.
"This is a window of opportunity that has been opened and should not be squandered," Erdogan added.
The agreement includes all rebel groups apart from the Islamic State and the Kurdish YPG, a Free Syrian Army spokesperson said - but Turkey has made contradictory statements about the groups that can still be attacked.
Ahead of the deal coming into force, air strikes continued to pound rebel-held areas close to Damascus, with at least 40 people killed on Thursday alone in the rebel stronghold of Eastern Ghouta.
Fifteen of the dead were civilians, including six children, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.
Activists said a school was among the targets hit - footage purporting to be from the scene showed terrified children running screaming through smoke outside a building marked "Future School".
Russia's embassy in Damascus was targeted again by shelling for the second time in two days, according to RIA Novosti, Russia's state-owned international news agency.
There were no reported casualties and only minor damage caused by the two rockets that were fired from rebel-held areas in the capital.
"Another attack on a Russian diplomatic mission is unacceptable and deserves the strongest condemnation," said Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharov, who added that the militants would not be allowed to disrupt the ceasefire.
Despite the ongoing bloodshed on the ground into Thursday afternoon, the Syrian government said it will halt all operations at mignight local time.
"The general command of the armed forces announces a complete halt to all hostilities on Syrian territory from the zero hour of December 30th," it said in a statement.

'Fingers on the trigger'

The Syrian National Coalition, a main opposition umbrella group, said it backed the deal.
"The National Coalition expresses support for the agreement and urges all parties to abide by it," spokesperson Ahmed Ramadan told AFP of the deal.
The Free Syrian Army has also said that it will agree to the deal, but that it reserves the right to respond to any violations.
"We will have our fingers on the trigger," a spokesperson, Osama Abu Zeid, told a press conference in Ankara, stressing that the opposition is prepared to attend peace talks.
Rebel groups are insisting that the ceasefire deal includes all armed opposition factions apart from the Islamic State.
However, Turkey said that groups classified as "terrorist" by the UN Security Council - which include both the Islamic State and Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, the rebranded version of al-Qaeda affiliate al-Nusra Front - would not be part of the deal.
Russia added that any group that had not signed Thursday's agreement would be considered "terrorist," hinting that other groups could be excluded from the ceasefire deal.
According to the Russian ministry of defence, the seven rebel groups that have signed the agreement are: Feilak al-Sham, Ahrar al-Sham, Jaysh al-Islam, Thuwar al-Sham, Jaysh al-Mujahideen, Jaysh Idlib and Jabhat al-Shamiyyah.
Russia's defence minister, Sergey Lavrov, said on Thursday that the seven groups that signed the deal include some 60,000 fighters.
Pro-government troops celebrate as they advance through formerly rebel-held districts of Aleppo (AFP)
Russia and Turkey to oversee ceasefire
A new round of peace talks will also be held within a month in Kazakh capital Astana, with rebel groups guaranteed the right to assemble their own negotiating team.
The UN will participate in the talks, which will take place according to a UN resolution agreed following a previous round of talks. 
Abu Zeid said Russia will be responsible for ensuring that Iranian troops and militia groups supportive of Assad comply with the ceasefire.
He also said that there will be no geographical exclusions to the ceasefire, which will affect all of Syria.
Russia had reportedly been insisting that Eastern Ghouta, a rebel stronghold close to the Syrian capital Damascus, be excluded from the ceasefire, meaning it could continue to be subject to shelling and air strikes.
Thursday's Russia-Turkey deal came, he said, after the "failure" of the international community to protect Syrians or deliver humanitarian aid to people in besieged areas.
Turkey and Russia will oversee the implementation of the ceasefire deal, Turkey confirmed on Thursday.
The announcement of the ceasefire came after Russian war planes bombing the town of al-Bab for the first time on Wednesday, aiding a ground advance by Turkish troops.

READ: Russia bombs IS-held town in Syria, aids Turkish advance

'Fragile' ceasefire deal
“This agreement we’ve reached is very fragile, as we all understand," said Russian President Vladimir Putin during a meeting with Russian foreign and defence ministers. "They require special attention and patience, professional attitude, and constant contact with our partners."
Putin also said the ceasefire would not see Russia step back from its support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad however.
"I agree with the proposal from the defence ministry for the reduction of our military presence in Syria," Putin said in a televised meeting, insisting Russia would still continue to support Assad. 
Russia is also prepared to ask Egypt to join the deal, said Lavarov on Thursday, adding that Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Jordan could also become part of the deal.
There have been several ceasefire deals during the more than five years of the Syrian conflict - however, all have fallen through after a short period due to alleged violations.

Donald Trump Just Insulted The United Nations, And Their Response Is Perfect



Occupy Democrats- 
Donald Trump recently took a shot at the United Nations, calling it “just a club for people to have a good time” in a tweet. It appears to have been in response to the United Nations Security Council approving a resolution demanding that Israel immediately halt their illegal construction of settlements in Palestinian land.

Trump’s Republican overlords told him that this was bad for Israel, so he took to Twitter to complain about it, in an immature and entirely pathetic attempt to delegitimize the world’s largest multilateral diplomatic organization.

The United Nations has such great potential but right now it is just a club for people to get together, talk and have a good time. So sad!

Not two hours later, the United Nations’ Twitter account replied with some cold hard facts about the incredible work that the United Nations, its executive committee agencies (United Nation’s Children’s Fund, the World Food Program, United Nation Development Program, and the United Nations Population Fund) and dozens of smaller branch organizations like the World Health Organization and the UN Refugee Agency, do for billions of people around the world.




Here's a list of 10 ways the UN makes a difference in the lives of millions every day.

See what else we do: http://bit.ly/1PMffVk 

 A small-minded and self-obsessed vulgarian who uses his own charity organization to launder money through and to buy himself paintings of himself is incapable of even conceiving how much work that more than fifty thousand UN employees do every year, fighting epidemics of disease and monitoring the effects of climate change and providing for the basic needs of people left behind by selfish capitalists and the strongarm dictators that Trump worships.


UN aid workers put their lives in danger to deliver medicine and food to starving civilians in war zones across the world, only to die when Trump’s best friend Vladimir Putin rain bombs on their aid convoys. The men of UN peacekeeping missions have spent years battling terrorism in Somalia and keeping the fledgling government – the first since 1991 – afloat, as well as helping to prevent genocide in the Central African Republic and Burundi. When natural disaster strikes in far-away nations, the United Nations is on the ground, setting up relief camps, digging people out of the rubble, administering first aid, delivering food aid to the homeless. When

When natural disaster strikes in America, Donald Trump is on the scene for a photo shoot then it’s back to the mansion!

While not everything the UN does is a success and or without issue, the good that the UN does in the world is unquantifiable. Donald Trump could not be more wrong or more horrendously offensive when he disparages the UN as a “club for people to get together and have a good time.” Trump, a narcissistic rapist who has never gone a day in his life without clenching a silver spoon in his tiny little hands, should be forced to spend a day in a Mosul refugee camp so he could gain a little perspective on what the UN truly does – and to see the suffering that Trump’s incompetence and ignorance will surely lead to.

Donald Trump Just Insulted The United Nations, And Their Response Is Perfect


President Obama speaks about counterterrorism during his visit to MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa on Dec. 6. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)

 

The Obama administration is close to announcing a series of measures to punish Russia for its interference in the 2016 presidential election, including economic sanctions and diplomatic censure, according to U.S. officials.

The administration is finalizing the details, which also are expected to include covert action that will probably involve cyber-operations, the officials said. An announcement on the public elements of the response could come as early as this week.

The sanctions portion of the package culminates weeks of debate in the White House on how to revise a 2015 executive order that was meant to give the president authority to respond to cyberattacks from overseas but that did not cover efforts to influence the electoral system.

The Obama administration rolled the executive order out to great fanfare as a way to punish and deter foreign hackers who harm U.S. economic or national security.

The threat to use it last year helped wring a pledge out of China’s president that his country would cease hacking U.S. companies’ secrets to benefit Chinese firms.

In December, during a closed door briefing with senators, the CIA shared a secret assessment. The agency concluded it was now “quite clear“ that Russia’s goal was to the help Donald Trump win the White House. (Jason Aldag/The Washington Post)
But officials concluded this fall that the order could not, as written, be used to punish the most significant cyber-provocation in recent memory against the United States — Russia’s hacking of Democratic organizations, targeting of state election systems and meddling in the presidential election.

With the clock ticking, the White House is working on adapting the authority to punish the Russians, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. President Obama pledged this month that there would be a response to Moscow’s interference in the U.S. elections.

Russia had denied involvement in the hacking.

One clear way to use the order against the Russian suspects would be to declare the electoral systems part of the “critical infrastructure” of the United States. Or the order could be amended to clearly apply to the new threat — interfering in elections.

Administration officials would also like to make it difficult for President-elect Donald Trump to roll back any action they take.

“Part of the goal here is to make sure that we have as much of the record public or communicated to Congress in a form that would be difficult to simply walk back,” said one senior administration official.
Obama issued the executive order in April 2015, creating the sanctions tool as a way to hold accountable people who harm computer systems related to critical functions such as electricity generation or transportation, or who gain a competitive advantage through the cyber­­theft of commercial secrets.

The order allows the government to freeze the assets in the United States of people overseas who have engaged in cyber-acts that have threatened U.S. national security or financial stability. The sanctions would also block commercial transactions with the designated individuals and bar their entry into the country.

But just a year later, a Russian military spy agency would hack into the Democratic National Committee and steal a trove of emails that were released a few months later on WikiLeaks, U.S. officials said. Other releases followed, including the hacked emails of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta.

“Fundamentally, it was a low-tech, high-impact event,” said Zachary Goldman, a sanctions and national security expert at New York University School of Law. And the 2015 executive order was not crafted to target hackers who steal emails and dump them on WikiLeaks or seek to disrupt an election. “It was an authority published at a particular time to address a particular set of problems,” he said.

So officials “need to engage in some legal acrobatics to fit the DNC hack into an existing authority, or they need to write a new authority,” Goldman said.

Administration officials would like Obama to use the power before leaving office to demonstrate its utility.

“When the president came into office, he didn’t have that many tools out there to use as a response” to malicious cyber-acts, said Ari Schwartz, a former senior director for cybersecurity on the National Security Council. “Having the sanctions tool is really a big one. It can make a very strong statement in a way that is less drastic than bombing a country and more impactful than sending out a cable from the State Department.”

The National Security Council concluded that it would not be able to use the authority against Russian hackers because their malicious activity did not clearly fit under its terms, which require harm to critical infrastructure or the theft of commercial secrets.

“You would (a) have to be able to say that the actual electoral infrastructure, such as state databases, was critical infrastructure, and (b) that what the Russians did actually harmed it,” said the administration official. “Those are two high bars.”

Although Russian government hackers are believed to have penetrated at least one state voter-registration database, they did not tamper with the data, officials said.

Some analysts believe that state election systems would fit under “government facilities,” which is one of the 16 critical infrastructure sectors designated by the Department of Homeland Security.

Another option is to use the executive order against other Russian targets — say, hackers who stole commercial secrets — and then, in either a public message or a private one, make clear that the United States considers its electoral systems to be critical infrastructure.

The idea is not only to punish but also to deter.

“As much as I am concerned about what happened to us in the election, I am also concerned about what will happen to us in the future,” a second administration official said. “I am firmly convinced that the Russians and others will say, ‘That worked pretty well in 2016, so let’s keep going.’ We have elections every two years in this country.”

Even the threat of sanctions can have deterrent value. Officials and experts point to Chinese President Xi Jinping’s agreement with Obama last year that his country would stop commercial cyber­spying. Xi came to the table after news reports that summer that the administration was preparing to sanction Chinese companies.

Complicating matters, the Trump transition team has not yet had extensive briefings with the White House on cybersecurity issues, including the potential use of the cyber sanctions order. The slow pace has caused consternation among officials, who fear that the administration’s accomplishments in cyber­­security could languish if the next administration fails to understand their value.

Sanctions are not a silver bullet. Obama noted that “we already have enormous numbers of sanctions against the Russians” for their activities in Ukraine. So it is questionable, some experts say, whether adding new ones would have a meaningful effect in changing the Kremlin’s behavior. But in combination with other measures, they could be effective.

Criminal indictments of Russians might become an option, officials said, but the FBI has so far not gathered enough evidence that could be introduced in a criminal case. At one point, federal prosecutors and FBI agents in San Francisco considered indicting Guccifer 2.0, a nickname for a person or people believed to be affiliated with the Russian influence operation and whose true identity was unknown.

Before the election, the administration used diplomatic channels to warn Russia. Obama spoke to Russian President Vladi­mir Putin at a Group of 20 summit in China in September. About a week before the election, the United States sent a “hotline”-style message to Moscow using a special channel for crisis communication created in 2013 as part of the State Department’s Nuclear Risk Reduction Center. As part of that message, the officials said, the administration asked Russia to stop targeting state voter registration and election systems. It was the first use of that system. The Russians, officials said, appeared to comply.

What Foreign Policy Staff Read in 2016

What Foreign Policy Staff Read in 2016

No automatic alt text available.BY FP STAFF-DECEMBER 29, 2016

This has been the year that proved that everything people liked in the 1990s — the internet, the Clintons, the triumph of American capitalism — is actually awful, especially the internet. Disrupted wasn’t my favorite book of the year, but it’s the one I’ve found myself referring to most often in conversation. On the surface, it’s a funny, sly memoir of being out of place — too old, too cranky, and too skeptical — but beyond that, it’s an exposé of how unsustainable, absurd, and corrupt the world of “tech” is.
“Tech” is very different from actual technology. “Tech” means Uber, losing nearly a billion dollars a year, bulldozing their way through regulations thanks to a virtual blank check from investors. The mix of venture capital and the belief that apps can solve everything is, as Lyons shows, financially and socially dangerous. Like “finance” in the run-up to 2008 (and, well, finance today), it’s a ticking time bomb that will cover us all in shrapnel when it explodes.

Alicia Wittmeyer, Europe editor

The Orientalist, by Tom Reiss

This book tells the incredible story of Lev Nussimbaum, a descendent of shtetl Jews who grew up wealthy in pre-World War I Baku, Azerbaijan, escaped the Soviets by fleeing to Weimar Germany, reinvented himself as a Muslim prince and then wrote, among other things, the great Azerbaijani novel, under the pen name Kurban Said. (That novel, Ali and Nino, which is about a Muslim boy and a Christian girl who fall in love, coincidentally was made into a movie this year.) The Orientalist, which was published way back in 2005, is first and foremost, a story of an amazing life, one that intersects with the historical currents of the time in dramatic ways. But, as Reiss tells it, it is also the story of a person who, at a time when the world was embracing dangerous racisms and nationalisms, embodied in his person a determination to not succumb to a desire to eliminate complexity — which sadly, is a theme that feels even more relevant today, more than a decade later.

Reid Standish, associate editor, digital

The Tiger: A True Story of Vengeance and Survival, by John Vaillant

Set in the wilderness of the Pri­morye region, on Russia’s far eastern border, Vaillant tells the tale of the hunt for a gigantic man-eating Amur tiger. Against the backdrop of the social and economic fallout of the collapse of the Soviet Union, The Tiger is as much a man vs. beast story as it is about the tumult and uncertainty of life in post-Soviet Russia — a mix of Moby Dick or Jaws with Andrey
Zvyagintsev’s Leviathan. Vaillant’s work of nonfiction recreates the extraordinary series of events that took place in 1997 and the team of trackers — usually charged with protecting wildlife from poachers — now dispatched to hunt down the tiger. Like most well-made man vs. nature stories, the beast itself is out of sight, but never far, and Vaillant’s narrative successfully captures the drama and tension of this adventure into the wild.

Solving the mystery of why the Amur tiger — known as a fearsome predator, but never one of people — went rogue is the central thrust of the book. What changed for the tiger to acquire a taste for human flesh? What could have thrown off the balance between man and nature? Vaillant’s book is not a political story — Moscow and the inner workings of the Kremlin are far from the minds of the characters. But in a time of rising fear and a lack of understanding between Russia and the West, this book provides a much-needed exploration of the changes that have taken place inside the world’s largest country — even if only in one of its furthest frontiers.

Ty McCormick, Africa editor

City of Thorns: Nine Lives in the World’s Largest Refugee Camp, by Ben Rawlence
In a year in which the refugee crisis dominated the headlines but too often drifted out of focus, obscured by its own unfathomable enormity, this book offers a piercing and at times disarmingly intimate account of life in the world’s largest refugee camp. Home to more than 300,000 mostly Somali refugees, the Dadaab complex in northeastern Kenya is, in Rawlence’s words, an “open prison in the desert.” Residents are forbidden to work or even to leave the camp without special authorization. “And through our tax contributions to the U.N., we all pay billions of dollars to keep them there,” he writes. The depth of this tragedy is revealed through the personal narratives Rawlence weaves together in the book. There is the football fanatic, the cynical drug addict, and the tenacious student who dreams of winning a university scholarship. In all of them, we recognize a little bit of ourselves. And through reading their stories, it becomes a little harder to deny that under different circumstances any one of them could be us.

Kavitha Surana, editorial fellow

Migrant, Refugee, Smuggler, Saviour, by Peter Tinti and Tuesday Reitano

Migration issues in Europe often break through the news cycle at the most dramatic and tragic points: Refugees charging through barbed wire as border police try to keep them out, or a drowned child washed up on the shores of the Mediterranean. But the journey in search of safe haven and economic opportunity begins long before boarding a boat to reach Europe’s shores. Tinti and Reitano’s book is a must-read for anyone trying to understand the mechanics of the migration crisis in a wider perspective. By focusing in on the conflicted role of the smuggler (who often doubles as a savior for those he is transporting), Tinti and Reitano shed light on one of the most under-examined facets of the ongoing crisis: A multibillion dollar industry of criminal networks that function as a last resort for people in dire circumstances when few legal migration pathways exist. The book isn’t just rigorously researched and packed with fascinating details, but clearly benefits from a reporter’s eye, weaved throughout with gripping first-hand accounts. While Europe’s leaders often respond to the “refugee crisis” with calls to tamp down on the flow of “illegal migrants” and the “traffickers” who abet them, Tinti and Reitano reach beyond those stale labels to help readers understand the nuanced incentives driving the migrant industry.

Cameron Abadi, deputy editor, online

Children of Paradise: The Struggle for the Soul of Iran, by Laura Secor

This should be the first book anyone reads about the Iranian reform movement. It’s a survey of its entirety, from the idealistic anti-colonial intellectual debates that inspired the Islamic revolution, to the political struggles to establish a genuinely new and just political order, to the more recent attempts, in the form of the Green Movement, to protest against the oppressive order that was ultimately established.
Whether or not Secor intended it that way, her book also feels like the last book on this subject one should ever have to read. There are still self-identified reformist politicians in Iran committed to incrementally improving the system, but it’s hard not to judge their broader project a tragedy. The questions posed by the original revolutionaries, and the subsequent reformers, were, and still are, worthy; are notions of liberty and justice really worthy of the name if they don’t emerge from the societies expressing them? But the answers they gave — and the central political space they afforded to God, and thus to political authoritarians in their own midst — hardly seems salvageable. Secor shows that the Iranian reformists didn’t just fail to square the circle they drew; she shows they never had a chance to succeed.

Brian Stout, copy editor

Destiny and Power: The American Odyssey of George Herbert Walker Bush, by Jon Meacham
A quarter-century removed from the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and as observers anxiously wonder what the near future holds for the U.S. role in the world, it’s worth revisiting the life and career of President George H.W. Bush. The first President Bush’s steady leadership through uncertainty has been largely taken for granted. While Ronald Reagan’s ideological clarity and soaring rhetoric have made him a conservative icon, it was his successor who had the more onerous responsibilities — and remarkable accomplishments — of managing the Cold War’s waning moments. Bush’s foreign policy was pragmatic yet resolute, defending American interests and values simultaneously without sacrificing one for the other. Meacham attributes this to the personal traits imbued in him early on: private ambition, public self-effacement, and a sense that with great privilege comes great responsibility. As a biographer, Meacham is judicious, drawing mostly from years of audio diaries and interviews with his subject. Presenting his sweeping portrait of the 41st U.S. president with a novelist’s prose, Meacham’s compelling book reveals an often distant man in whom readers will find a surprisingly sympathetic character.

Keith Johnson, deputy managing editor, news

The Fleet at Flood Tide: America at Total War in the Pacific, 1944-1945, by James D. Hornfischer
The decisive moment of the Pacific War wasn’t at Midway or Guadalcanal, but rather, the full mobilization of the U.S. war economy that Japanese Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto warned about before Pearl Harbor. That finally came together in the Central Pacific island-hopping campaign, exemplified by the assault on Saipan. Hornfischer places the campaign, wonderfully depicted as all his naval histories are, within U.S. strategic goals in the Pacific, especially the need for bases for B-29 bombers. Also noteworthy and welcome: the attention Hornfischer pays to the logistics challenges of the long-distance Pacific war.
Emily Tamkin, staff writer

Swing Time, by Zadie Smith

Zadie Smith’s latest novel is the story of two girls — both half black and half white — who grow up together and then grow apart. One is a naturally talented dancer who is unable to make it passed her past. The other grows up to be the personal assistant to a white pop star who, almost on a whim, decides she wants to build a school for girls in West Africa. The story swings back and forth between their pasts and presents.

But it’s also the story of diverse pockets of London, and of the inequality that nevertheless persists in them, and of people who make it out of the places from which they come, and the people who don’t. It’s about inequality, and injustice, and people who have never known either, and people who will never know anything but. And it’s all set to infectious rhythm of Smith’s prose. Pair with her post-election essay/speech, “On Optimism and Despair,” and you have a powerful antidote to so much of what was asserted in and by 2016.

Benjamin Soloway, assistant editor

Leg Over Leg, or the Turtle in the Tree: Concerning the Fariyaq, What Manner of Creature Might He Be, by Ahmad Faris al­-Shidyaq, edited and translated from the Arabic by Humphrey Davies
I haven’t read many novels in translation from Arabic. What better place to begin than at the beginning? Ahmad Faris al­-Shidyaq’s picaresque, somewhat maniacal “four-book opuscule,” published in Paris in 1855, may be the first of its kind in Arabic, according to the New York Review of Books. The text is worth the expedition it demands: a ramble through Lebanon, Egypt, Malta, Tunis, England, and France — with detours in the form of musings, rhyming passages, and in some memorable instances, protracted catalogues of “rare” words for genitalia and their uses — and through much of the protagonist’s life. Al­-Shidyaq’s commentaries on love and language — and on places, the people who populate them, and their customs — are quite singular, and his delight in language offers a glimpse, however pale in translation, of the richness of a classical Arabic beyond the reach of most readers this edition will attract.

Photo credit: PETER MACDIARMID/Getty Images