Jan. 17 musings, and late updates

The more I read, and the more I think about what has gone on, and what will need to go on for democracy to take root in Tunisia, the more I am convinced I was wrong early on about the U.S. government's handling of this situation.

When Sec. Clinton equivocated, and we said 'we're not taking sides,' I was pretty outraged because right and wrong are so clear in Tunisia. Ben Ali is a bastard. The Jasmine Revolution was made up of people to whom we could relate, and admire. I was personally upset because America didn't join in wholeheartedly on the side of what was RIGHT.

More and more, I've thought - but what would that have meant? What would it have meant if we jumped in 100%?

Ever since the invasion of Iraq, the U.S. is a toxic brand name to connect with your product in the Arab world - we're ValuJet, the Pinto, New Coke, and Mel Gibson all rolled into one in many minds. Which is to say that if we come out and support one idea, or one movement within a country, all of a sudden it's pretty easy for the Islamists to paint that idea or movement as 'an American tool,' or worse. 

Honestly, I sort of think the best thing we could do would be to embrace the crazies. Our brand value is so poor, that might do more to marginalize them than anything else!

• Reporters at major newspapers are organizing to establish and publish two daily papers, al Chourouk and le Quotidien, beginning Tuesday.

• EPA photog Lucas Dolega now confirmed dead.

• A few days before Ben Ali was sent packing, our friends were saying that the army was refusing to fire on civilians, and that the chief of staff had been sacked. After Ben Ali's departure, many believed that the military, led by said CoS Gen. Rachid Ammar, was the only stabilizing force in the nation.

But over the past 24 hours, there have been increasing concerns among some of our friends that Gen. Ammar seems to be positioning himself through the media as the last honest man in Tunisia. This evening, The WSJ is lionizing Ammar as apolitical this evening. By all accounts, press and from our friends, the military has indeed done a great job. But one must wonder if Ammar is getting ready for something bigger come March.

• WP's Jennifer Rubin poses a question she thinks she has the answer to: Did Iraq have anything to do with Tunisia? She's suggesting that it did, that the flourishing of democracy between the Tigris and Euphrates emboldened the Tunisian people to rise up. My question to Ms. Rubin: Are you &*^*% kidding? You can't come up with two Arab nations more dissimilar than Tunisia and Iraq. One of my American friends recounted that a Tunisian friend said online Saturday, and not in a good way, "We're becoming Iraq." Hard to believe that Tunisia is becoming a political football for American neocons to attempt to justify Iraq. Rubin's right to challenge the wishy-washiness of American support thus far. But her big finish trying to tie this into Iraq simply flies in the face of logic and reason.

• Jerusalem Post has a pretty interesting editorial about the Tunisia situation, and inadvertently brings up one of the biggest conundrums. The column heralds GWB for his commitment to democracies in the Arab world... and then rails about Hamas. What's more important: Holding elections, or seeing your own guy win?