FRAMESHOP:FRAMESHOP: THE NEWSPEAK OF JOHN BOLTON

Going back over John Bolton's recent statement to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I was struck by the sheer quantity of newspeak he dropped in the laps of our Senators.

'Newspeak,' is a term used George Orwell's political novel 1984 (published in 1949) and also in an earlier essay Orwell wrote caled 'Politics And The English Language.' it means, roughly: words and phrases that people in power create and use with the specific goal of masking the truth of government action.

What was Bolton hiding in his testimony about the Middle East? Let's take a look and see if we can figure it out.

Drive the debate! LINK to this FRAMESHOP article:

   http://jeffrey-feldman.typepad.com/frameshop/2006/07/frameshop_the_n.html

The actual transcript can be found here (large PDF file).  This section is listed under the subheading "The Situation in the Middle East."  Bolton's words, my emphasis:

The Situation in the Middle East Mr. Chairman, we are all aware of the crisis and tragedy unfolding in the Middle East. The United States is exhausting all diplomatic efforts to resolve the situation. The situation is so fluid that it is inherently difficult for me to go into specifics, given that the Lebanon Core Group, including Foreign Ministers, just met in Rome. Secretary Rice was unequivocal, though, in making clear that the United States seeks a "durable solution...one that strengthens the forces of peace and democracy in the region." A truly democratic Middle East is our best long-term hope to ensure that we achieve a lasting, permanent peace.

Exactly what are the 'forces of peace.'  I thought peace was the opposite of 'force.'  Calm, serene, the absence of war--by Bolton's estimation, peace is a powerful force. Bring on the great bulldozer of peace!  Jack up that peace boombox!  Kick out the peace!  Hammer...that...peace...the...f#%*...into...the...ground!  'Forces of peace.'

But wait...there's more:

The Security Council is also actively seized of the matter. We are working closely with other Members of the Council to ensure that appropriate, I stress appropriate, action is taken by the Council. It would be a disservice and only bring increased hardship to the peoples of Israel and Lebanon if the Security Council adopted stopgap measures, which would do nothing to address the root causes of the violence. It was with this in mind that the United States felt it necessary to veto a lopsided Resolution two weeks ago on this matter, the first time we had to do so in almost two years.

This idea of 'root cause of the violence' being a description of what needs to be addressed reminds me of the man who, while beating his wife to a bloody pulp, yells in her face, "I hate it when you make me do this!"

The 'root cause' of the violence is a number of things.  We won't ever agree on that completely.  But it's not the 'root cause' of the violence that's killing people.  It's the 'violence' itself that's killing people.  Hezbollah is not launching 'root causes' at Haifa.  Root causes aren't blowing up buildings in Kyrat Shmoneh.  Israel isn't dropping guided root causes on apartment blocks in Beirut.  Root causes aren't killing children.  

But according to Bolton, none of this is dangerous .  It's the 'root causes' that are killing people.  

And again, there's more:

We are actively considering the variety of proposals on the table on how best to secure the implementation of Resolution 1559, including the insertion of an international stabilization force. I would value any thoughts you or your colleagues may have on this matter. For our part, our view is that we must always keep at the forefront that the key goal should be to disarm and "defang" Hezbollah, to quote Secretary Rice.

OK, fair enough.  I think it is a good idea to disarm and defang Hezbollah.  But wait a minute...if we go with the metaphor of Hezbollah is somewhat of an angry 'dog'--why do we also want the kid walking the dog shot?  If the dog is the problem, you shoot the dog.  If the kid is the problem, you shoot the kid.   It seems that we have a situation where the dog is the problem, and the solution is to just blow up the whole block.

And here is the best newspeak of all:

The question of Israel's response has come up as well. Of course it is a matter of great concern to us, as President Bush has stressed, that civilian deaths are occurring. It is a tragedy, and I would not attempt to describe it any other way. We have urged the government of Israel to exercise the greatest possible care in its use of force.

That's right:  'care in its use of force.'  What Bush wants is to see that everyone exercises 'care' when they use force.  Go ahead and use force, but be caring, now...we want you to be caring.  Caring force.  

Let's go back for a second to the husband beating his wife,"...I...beat...you...because...I...just...care...so...much!"

(ehem).

Big finish, now:

Mr. Chairman, the United States remains firmly committed to working through the Security Council, indeed through all diplomatic channels, to finding a lasting end to the violence. We hope that from this current crisis we can seize the opportunity to once and forever dismantle Hezbollah, restore democratic control by Lebanon over all of its territory, and lay the foundations that would allow Israel to live in peace with its neighbors.

Now, the last time I checked, when somebody 'lays a foundation,' that means they dig a hole, pour cement and put down the structure on which something can stand--a building, a bridge, a bowling alley--whatever.

Laying the foundation--for argument's sake--is the EXACT OPPOSITE of blowing up a building with a bomb!!

Ain't nobody layin' any foundations that I can see.  Because when you're done laying a foundation,  you're not staring at a great big pile of rubble.

NEWSPEAK TO GO, PLEASE!
What was Bolton hiding in these statements about the Middle East? The answer is not hard to find: The Bush administration is talking about 'peace,' but in fact they are quite interested--if not satisfied--with the current 'war.' If you want war, but need the American public to think you want peace--get John Bolton on the phone. He has all the newspeak you need to mask your true intent.

So that is our U.N. ambassador taking some time to leave a big pile of stinking propaganda at the feet of the U.S. Senate.

No matter what you think about the situation in the Middle East at this stage, you have to stand back and marvel at the Orwellian gobbledygook of the fuzzy faced man who represents our nation on the great stage of international affairs.

© 2006 Jeffrey Feldman