Saturday, December 02, 2006

Enemies of the state

Politics is dirty business. I just can't really to get used to it, and always find myself marveling, just how much dirty they are.
Neither Arkadi Gaydamak nor Avigdor Lieberman are my favorite characters. Lieberman is proving himself as just another greedy politician and Gaidamak has made his fortune from arms deals. But there is some people in the government and the media, that so much afraid of them, that they are ready to do all they can, to prevent them in their way to power, no matter if it is illegal, immoral or ugly. If you have read the Israeli papers in the past month, you would know what I'm talking about.
By the amount of filth that was poured in their direction, you could think of them as some enemies of the state, or criminals like Benny Sela.

Have you read "Running for Governor" by Mark Twain? Some thing never change.


Irina Tsukerman said...

Well, arms sales are arms sales. How do you think people get to power? You have to be ready to do certain things, and shake some dirty hands, if you want to gain any type of political influence. I could think of worse things than making arms of arms deals, especially if they benefit Israel, or at least, don't harm it. I have no doubt Gaidamaka has a few things on his conscience, but you have to consider whether what he's doing will benefit the state or harm it. If his actions are good for the state, well, then, he's probably a better alternative than some of the incumbents.

Yury Puzis said...

It occurred to me that the state of Israel also sales arms. Definitely more then Gaidamak. And definitely to some, lets say, unwanted weapon holders (think China). Does it means that the money coming from those deals is dirty? It is really hard to say in some cases, but sometimes really simple. For example, I support selling arms to India. So, unless we know more details, I am sorry, "arms dealer" is not enough.
If he sells guns that kill children in Darfur, and uses the money to feed hungry children in Israel... then it is really bad.
Of course, another argument would be, weapons, whoever you sell it to, tend to end up in the wrong hands. Maybe. But if nobody puts them in the right hands, the only hands that will end up with guns will be the wrong ones.

Irina Tsukerman said...

Arms dealers are out there to make money. That's it. It's up to individual buyers to regulate how they want to use those weapons. So if the arms wind up in Darfur... well, there's not much to be done about that. Unless, you have an official embargo on Sudan or anyone who deals with that Sudan, and it's not illegal for private entities like Gaidamak to sell even there... there's no real way to stop it. It would be wonderful if major arms dealers only sold to "good" buyers... but the bad buyers just wind up buying weapons from someone else or on the black market, which is what happens most of the time anyway. I doubt Gaidamak would sell arms to Israel's enemies, though.

Woland said...

As for arms deals, in Angola, Gaydamak first supplied one side, then the other, and later assisted in arranging a cease fire between the two sides. In return he got monopoly on Angola's diamond mines.
He is no saint, but he did more for Israel than many others.

BTW, an unpublished post of mine was called "Eat your food, or Lieberman will come to take you!" When Lieberman was about to join the government, the "objective", "unbiased" and "trustworthy" media has made him such a warm welcome that Freddy Kruger would appear as a saint compared to Lieberman's media description.