FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Terrorism vs. Tayloris

Frederick Taylor’s 1911 Principles of Scientific Management came to define the treatment of workers in a system where efficiency: the most work done in the most time was what managers cared about. To an author who infamously provided the decisive answer to “how many times per minute should my secretary be able to open and close a file drawer?” (25 times–for other tasks, exactly 0.04 minutes per folder and .026 minutes per drawer), we now owe everything from class rank by grade point average to ring-per-minute tracking on retail workers to the U.S.’s standing army of management consultants. But it is doubtful that even Taylor would apply his wide-ranging theories on maximum efficiency to international diplomacy in the same way that the Bush and Sharon administrations have implicitly agreed to do in the case of Israel’s “goals” in Palestine.

Following the brutal fighting on both sides and Sharon’s decision to invade by military force the small portion of the West Bank that is actually under the control of the Palestinian Authority, Bush and Powell made their formulaic and insistent pleas for Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories–pleas that could easily become demands if the United States threatened to actually end, or even reduce, its constant financial and military support of Israel’s current occupation of Palestinian territory.

These empty calls for “peace” would seem no different than any other interaction between the U.S. and its client state–except for the odd notions of diplomatic effort that are belied by both what Bush has left unsaid and what Sharon has said in return: human lives ranking somewhere south of uncomfortable lengths of time.

Bush, predictably, voiced no real deadlines in his call for the Israeli army to withdraw, and spoke of no penalties for Israel’s current flagrant neglect of a recent and groundbreaking Security Council resolution. He also placed the blame squarely on Arafat for the recent wave of suicide bombings by Palestinian extremists (although how Arafat was supposed to create a more perfect Bantustan when his own security forces bore the brunt of Israeli “reprisals” is uncertain). But the U.S. administration is clearly distraught over Israel’s rather ill-timed decision to take up the mantle of the “war on terrorism”. Arab solidarity against Iraq, even among the despots of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, is fast disappearing, and Bush sorely needs another military target to continue his most politically successful venture to date. An Israeli offensive that will rile up the popular elements of Arab society against their <U.S.-allied> dictators is not a good way to start a “regional” invasion to remove Iraq’s own dictatorship.

So how has Sharon responded? Statements that he will “expedite” his military operations so as not to extend his army’s diplomatically irritating stay in the already-devastated cities of Palestine. Get in, ensure that Palestine has no stable position from which to fight for its people, and get out before anyone important has time to get truly angry about it. The administration, if it meant what it said, should take this as a slap in the face by Israel. A certain amount of civilians attacked, imprisoned and killed over thirty days is no more disgusting than the same amount over ten days (and if anything can be said by either side of the conflict, it is that more civilian casualties are inevitable if Israel’s offense continues).

But to Bush and Co., the destabilizing of an already corrupt and unpopular Arafat regime (to make way for what?), the increasing popularity of Hamas and other fundamentalists in the face of Israeli state terrorism, an indiscriminate Israeli offensive and the Palestinians and Israelis that it will destroy, are all peripheral next to the threat of a thoroughly inefficient and long-lasting campaign that might ruin the plans of the United States.

So Sharon’s statement is taken as satisfactory on Capitol Hill–“without delay” is defined as “without delay” by Condoleeza Rice in an interview, or, alternatively, as “right now”. No one claims that anything adverse will happen to, say, the U.S.’s massive foreign aid to Israel, if the army does not withdraw “without delay”, as this would imply that there was actual care for Palestinian lives weighing on Bush. But all Bush requires is an “efficient” invasion and withdrawal, one that accomplishes its “goal” of destroying anyone who threatens to provide an actual negotiating partner on the Palestinian side.

So how long should it take a client state to impose ruin and general disillusionment on a devastated populace? Obviously faster than Sharon’s current speed, which is what might finally lead Bush to support a more compliant replacement. Of course, it’s not as if the Palestinian or Israeli people are worth much more to the masters of diplomatic efficiency than a folder or a desk drawer. Taylorism reigns supreme in the judgment not only of employees but of policy-makers: Sharon will show his worth to the U.S.’s way of doing things by his ability to carry out an unpleasant task in a short period of time, no matter how deadly, sloppy, or destructive that task may be.

So what can Bush, Powell, and the rest do to prove that substance, not speed, is what they desire from Sharon? They can use their preoccupation with haste to demand actual deadlines for Israel’s withdrawal from the territory that it has already begun to demolish, with corresponding reductions in American military aid if Israel continues to use weapons supposedly provided to ward off foreign invasion against civilians within the occupied territories.

If Israel wants surface-to-air missiles to destroy refugee camps, it will have to buy them from the same less savory elements that provide Iraq with its arms (another U.S. client turned rogue). And the administration can refuse as meaningless Sharon’s plea that the invasion and destruction will occur more “quickly”, and begin to focus on the Israeli army’s own complicity, along with that of Arafat and Hamas, in what is currently occurring in the occupied territories.

Nick Ring is currently unschooled in Cary, NC and is on the Board of Directors for Youth Voice Raleigh. Ring can be reached at: nick_ring@hotmail.com

 

 

More articles by:

February 19, 2019
Richard Falk – Daniel Falcone
Troublesome Possibilities: The Left and Tulsi Gabbard
Patrick Cockburn
She Didn’t Start the Fire: Why Attack the ISIS Bride?
Evaggelos Vallianatos
Literature and Theater During War: Why Euripides Still Matters
Maximilian Werner
The Night of Terror: Wyoming Game and Fish’s Latest Attempt to Close the Book on the Mark Uptain Tragedy
Conn Hallinan
Erdogan is Destined for Another Rebuke in Turkey
Nyla Ali Khan
Politics of Jammu and Kashmir: The Only Viable Way is Forward
Mark Ashwill
On the Outside Looking In: an American in Vietnam
Joyce Nelson
Sir Richard Branson’s Venezuelan-Border PR Stunt
Ron Jacobs
Day of Remembrance and the Music of Anthony Brown        
Cesar Chelala
Women’s Critical Role in Saving the Environment
February 18, 2019
Paul Street
31 Actual National Emergencies
Robert Fisk
What Happened to the Remains of Khashoggi’s Predecessor?
David Mattson
When Grizzly Bears Go Bad: Constructions of Victimhood and Blame
Julian Vigo
USMCA’s Outsourcing of Free Speech to Big Tech
George Wuerthner
How the BLM Serves the West’s Welfare Ranchers
Christopher Fons
The Crimes of Elliot Abrams
Thomas Knapp
The First Rule of AIPAC Is: You Do Not Talk about AIPAC
Mitchel Cohen
A Tale of Two Citations: Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring” and Michael Harrington’s “The Other America”
Jake Johnston
Haiti and the Collapse of a Political and Economic System
Dave Lindorff
It’s Not Just Trump and the Republicans
Laura Flanders
An End to Amazon’s Two-Bit Romance. No Low-Rent Rendezvous.
Patrick Walker
Venezuelan Coup Democrats Vomit on Green New Deal
Natalie Dowzicky
The Millennial Generation Will Tear Down Trump’s Wall
Nick Licata
Of Stress and Inequality
Joseph G. Ramsey
Waking Up on President’s Day During the Reign of Donald Trump
Elliot Sperber
Greater Than Food
Weekend Edition
February 15, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Matthew Hoh
Time for Peace in Afghanistan and an End to the Lies
Chris Floyd
Pence and the Benjamins: An Eternity of Anti-Semitism
Rob Urie
The Green New Deal, Capitalism and the State
Jim Kavanagh
The Siege of Venezuela and the Travails of Empire
Paul Street
Someone Needs to Teach These As$#oles a Lesson
Andrew Levine
World Historical Donald: Unwitting and Unwilling Author of The Green New Deal
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Third Rail-Roaded
Eric Draitser
Impacts of Exploding US Oil Production on Climate and Foreign Policy
Ron Jacobs
Maduro, Guaidó and American Exceptionalism
John Laforge
Nuclear Power Can’t Survive, Much Less Slow Climate Disruption
Joyce Nelson
Venezuela & The Mighty Wurlitzer
Jonathan Cook
In Hebron, Israel Removes the Last Restraint on Its Settlers’ Reign of Terror
Ramzy Baroud
Enough Western Meddling and Interventions: Let the Venezuelan People Decide
Robert Fantina
Congress, Israel and the Politics of “Righteous Indignation”
Dave Lindorff
Using Students, Teachers, Journalists and other Professionals as Spies Puts Everyone in Jeopardy
Kathy Kelly
What it Really Takes to Secure Peace in Afghanistan
Brian Cloughley
In Libya, “We Came, We Saw, He Died.” Now, Maduro?
Nicky Reid
The Councils Before Maduro!
Gary Leupp
“It’s All About the Benjamins, Baby”
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail