Nuance and context
James O’Neill writes: Re. “Turnbull contradicts the ‘slaughter our way to peace’ crowd” (yesterday). Turnbull is certainly a welcome improvement on his unlamented predecessor and a more nuanced approach to foreign policy is to be applauded. It is one thing to recognise that previous policies, or those urged by the Liberal neanderthals behind him on the back benches, are likely to be counter-productive.
It is quite another thing however, to recognise that previous and current policies are more complex than the media generally acknowledge. As just one illustration, the geopolitics of what Pepe Escobar calls “pipelinestan” is crucial to an understanding of western (and US in particular) foreign policy. I look forward to reading about such issues in Crikey, although I am not holding my breath. It is the key to Russia, Ukraine, Qatar, Iran, Iraq and Syria just as it was to understanding the real reasons for the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. It will be interesting to see how far Turnbull’s willingness to “contextualise” extends in examining what his new best friend in the White House and his successors and predecessors are really up to.
Garry Muratore writes: Re. “Time for a name change” (yesterday). I’m surprised you never mentioned the popular FX animated series Archer which ran on Foxtel and is now on Netflix. It’s a hilarious spy spoof in which the main character Archer works for his mother’s spies for hire outfit ISIS. At the end of series five the “other” ISIS was starting to get traction and the producers of the show had a problem going into series six. They simply dropped all reference to ISIS and the show continues. I’m surprised they never tried to milk it for laughs given the subjects and plots of the series. Opportunity lost