Send in Madiba!

News Type: Opinion — Mon Jul 31, 2006 6:41 AM EDT

world-news, israel, war, un, lebanon, peace, south-africa, diplomacy, mandela

Photo by Sébastien Bertrand. (License: Creative Commons Attribution)

He is reverently called the Madiba. Now 88 years old, he is one man who has almost universal admiration. Nelson Mandela has to be one of the most credible people on earth.

He was once designated a terrorist by the Apartheid South African system. He was put in jail for 27 years but came out of jail to the South African State House and led his nation to reconciliation and laid the foundations of recovery.

As the Middle East continues to burn, I call on the powers that be to appoint Nelson Mandela as Special International Envoy to broker and mediate the peace.

If the parties in the conflict still believe in the United Nations, he could go on the platform of the United Nations with Security Council backing. Those who oppose the platform of the United Nations will doubtless offer other platforms that will enable this.

His mandate will be simple; Adopt shuttle diplomacy by visiting and consorting widely in the Middle East and then being debriefed by the UN Security council. His findings will then form the basis of a new Middle East peace plan that will be pushed whole-heartedly by the powers that be.

The most urgent need for Madiba's Magic is in Lebanon. He needs to be brought into the diplomatic fray that surrounds the War in Lebanon and would then be expected to act as a honest broker that can help work out a ceasefire, a temporary one at first but as has been described above, a more lasting one later.

Why not Mandela?

11 Votes
Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Published to:

Oluseye's Column, All of Newsvine
Groups: none
Regions: none

Public Discussion (15)

What's this?

Who's leading the conversation?

This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.

8.2

4.0

2.0

{"commentId":227497,"authorDomain":"ajzzz"}

ajzzz

He was once designated a terrorist by the Apartheid South African system.

He was the leader of a group that used terrorism, the term has been hijacked by certain states to only apply to groups that work against their interests. Before Israel was declared there was much Jewish terrorism against Britain in Palestine. The US protects a terrorist who bombed a Cuban airliner and a hotel, and another from Haiti involved in murder, arson, and severing of limbs.

Are these good terrorists? If so, why are others bad terrorists? Also, under the new definition, why can't states be terrorists anymore?

{"commentId":227497,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"ajzzz"}

6 votes

#1 - Mon Jul 31, 2006 8:29 AM EDT

{"commentId":227498,"authorDomain":"gregh"}

Greg Hoke

Zionism still has currency among a critical mass of believers. During those 27 years Mandela was incarcerated, Apartheid imploded. Key leaders of Apartheid actually desired reconciliation. In Israel, Rabin aimed the ship of state towards reconciliation but was assassinated. People I talked to actually thought his murderer was a hero rather than a maniac. Reconciliation in Ireland seems to be underway because economic prosperity makes people forget ethnic division in the pursuit of prosperity.

When the cycle of homicidal mania subsides and Israel stops assassinating its own leaders who desire reconciliation, Mandela's way stands a chance. Unfortunately Madiba will have passed away before that comes to pass in the Middle East.

It is still a good question to make one mull over the comparitive histories.

{"commentId":227498,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"gregh"}

3 votes

#2 - Mon Jul 31, 2006 8:29 AM EDT

{"commentId":227500,"authorDomain":"djehuty"}

Djehuty

He'd be a good choice. But peace requires the will to peace and Israel doesn't yet seem interested.

{"commentId":227500,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"djehuty"}

6 votes

#3 - Mon Jul 31, 2006 8:30 AM EDT

{"commentId":227582,"authorDomain":"mike3k"}

mike3k

Madiba may be the only one who could bring peace to the Middle East.

{"commentId":227582,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"mike3k"}

#4 - Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:52 AM EDT

{"commentId":227747,"authorDomain":"oped"}

Ugly Bastard

Hezbollah wants to eradicate Israel from the earth. Israel wants to survive.

They are at an impasse.

What can he do?

Nobody will listen to him.

{"commentId":227747,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"oped"}

3 votes

#5 - Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:29 AM EDT

{"commentId":227795,"authorDomain":"roan"}

Roan

Mandela does not have the necessary skills to mediate a peace. The success of post-apartheid South Africa had more to do with the South African people, and what Mandela did not do, than what he did do.

{"commentId":227795,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"roan"}

1 vote

#6 - Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:57 AM EDT

{"commentId":228220,"authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}

Oluseye

You didnt mention what skills you would consider necessary. But I think it goes beyond skills but credibility, neutrality, admiration and being a uniting figure.

By the way,Even what a leader does not do can be attributed to him. This is the role of the leader as an enabler.

{"commentId":228220,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}

#6.1 - Mon Jul 31, 2006 3:53 PM EDT

{"commentId":228287,"authorDomain":"roan"}

Roan

1. Diplomacy
2. Communication
3. Neutrality

I have just listed the 3 that I believe Mandela does not have the sufficient amount of in order to be considered the correct choice as a mediator for this situation. He is also lacking in the necessary experience that this type of role would require.

I agree that mediation goes beyond pure skills, but without the skills no amount of good-will is going to allow you to prevail.

Sure what a leader does not do can be attributed to him. My point was not to take credit away from Mandela, but to place him in a more realistic light.

{"commentId":228287,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"roan"}

1 vote

#6.2 - Mon Jul 31, 2006 4:31 PM EDT

{"commentId":229480,"authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}

Oluseye

Mandela is in fact known for being a powerful communicator, and for being diplomatic. His neutrality is the most obvious. I don't even know where to begin to supply info about this but I am certain that anyone can easily check this out.

{"commentId":229480,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}

#6.3 - Tue Aug 1, 2006 10:40 AM EDT

{"commentId":229690,"authorDomain":"roan"}

Roan

Oluseye, I think you are thinking of the myth and not the man. I have had several opportunities to witness Mandela in action, and he is neither a great communicator or diplomat. Not saying he is terrible, just not great.

Regarding neutrality, his support for the PLO and dislike of Israel is well know.

{"commentId":229690,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"roan"}

1 vote

#6.4 - Tue Aug 1, 2006 12:19 PM EDT

{"commentId":229780,"authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}

Oluseye

I have been priviledged to see him speak too, no less at Convocation at my University. He gave a great and memorable speech.

Mandela's dislike of Israel is not very well-known I disagree.

We'll agree to disagree.

{"commentId":229780,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}

#6.5 - Tue Aug 1, 2006 1:03 PM EDT

{"commentId":229884,"authorDomain":"roan"}

Roan

We'll agree to disagree.

Yes, I guess so.

On a related note, if you have not yet read Mandela's "The Struggle Is My Life", I can highly recommend it if your are interested in Mandela or South African history.

{"commentId":229884,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"roan"}

1 vote

#6.6 - Tue Aug 1, 2006 1:57 PM EDT

{"commentId":229966,"authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}

Oluseye

I have, thanks!

{"commentId":229966,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}

#6.7 - Tue Aug 1, 2006 2:54 PM EDT

{"commentId":229433,"authorDomain":"HonkyTonk"}

HonkyTonk

Mendela also lacks cultural legitimacy. He knew South Africa and South Africans innately. He knew the history and the culture. He knew how to talk to South Africans.

But this is a different sort of problem, with very differnt cultures. It would be too much to ask for the man to suddenly become an expert on the situation. Remember, the first time out, he had 27 years to think about it.

{"commentId":229433,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"HonkyTonk"}

2 votes

#7 - Tue Aug 1, 2006 10:15 AM EDT

{"commentId":229491,"authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}

Oluseye

Sometimes you need an outsider to come in and shed light. I am certain that he knows as well as anyone what the key issues are and the key problems. He has made several proposals in the past.

Mandela was not rendered great by spending 27 years in jail, so it is a bit of stretch, what you said.

{"commentId":229491,"threadId":"34176","contentId":"306726","authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}

1 vote

#7.1 - Tue Aug 1, 2006 10:45 AM EDT

{"canLink":false,"threadId":"34176","isPrivate":false}

OLUSEYE

Backyard

Send in Madiba!

Published to:

FUN STUFF:

COMPANY STUFF:

LEGAL STUFF: