The hoot behind the boot, otherwise knows as Shoe Diplomacy

In the era of communication and freedom of press enriched by mass awakening and awareness, it was not all that surprising to see the boots of Iraqi journalist Muntadhar al-Zaidi flying out to bid goodbye to the boot master who had ordered boots into Iraq.
The invasion inspired by the self-confessed information failure in 2003 has resulted in death of thousands of US troops and hundreds and thousands of Iraqis -- to the tune of millions perhaps.

Nothing could therefore go better with the smothered sentiment both in Iraq and the US than the hoot behind the boot as historic blunders cannot be concealed by warm handshakes and smiles. The parting kiss with its special hiss will go down in history as the warm-blooded expression of smart journalism aptly laced with boots.

In this world full of paradoxes, contradictions seem to have become part of the newly established world order where committing ugly crimes in the name of freedom is considered fashionable.

History stands witness to the death of millions and millions of humans who have been sacrificed at the so-called sacred altar of freedom. What is worse, transparency which is so often stressed in the Free World, seems to further confuse the already confused crowds in the Main Street, making the already opaque world more murky.

People cannot easily comprehend the humane logic behind the torture in the Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo detention camps. When laws legislated by the civilized world carve prisons and decorate them with barbed wire, when glaring contradictions define the profile of the civilized world, the repressed ego of the third world is bound to praise the affront packed in the darting boots.

The history of shoe diplomacy may be traced back to the 20th century political muscle-flexing. The US and the then huge Soviet Union with its fiery rhetoric were locked in a tug of war on the ideological front. The Soviets had scored brilliantly in space and their bulky large-headed leader Nikita Khrushchev, whose physical features were proportionate to the country he represented, resorted to shoe diplomacy in his own peculiar way to thump hot air out of the bloated heads of other comrades in arms of his era.

Why Khroschev did so may be possible to ascertain in the backdrop of the Cold War and the old war. One thing is certain, he did it out of hatred. At another occasion the late Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the prime minister of Pakistan was faced with a similar situation at a rally. He is said to have picked up the shoe, examined it closely and then remarked that shoes had become expensive, defusing the tension in the air with a witty retort.

Journalists also greeted Tony Blair and Clinton in 1999 with shoes, underpants and bras and other flying projectiles for their blatant aggression. Gandhi who lost one shoe while boarding a train tossed back the other mate that landed in close proximity of the first, making the pair useable for someone else.

What transpired at the goodbye news conference in Iraq at the hands of the young Iraqi journalist can be better understood in the light of the regional culture. It should not be treated as an isolated incidence emanating from the footprints of regional developments. Hatred is not a whim like sensuality that lust imposes and time disposes. It is as old as the history of creation. All the snow in the world can't freeze this monster.

The lame duck ducked with admirable dexterity. He warded off the incoming shoe, but the commander of the boots who stood in front of the flag he was supposed to uphold and defend was oblivious of the fact that the boot might strike the symbol of the country behind him.

The second shoe brushed past the American flag. Accepted that suddenness of the events surprised the occasion, but Bush who orders the boots into action failed to do what the moment expected. He could have turned the historic moment to his advantage by uttering LET HIM SPEAK in line with the known principles of democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of press and as a representative of the supposedly Free World. Bush should keep the boots as a telling reminder of his adventurism and consequent failures at home and abroad.

Shoes in the East should not be confused with the horse-shoe culture prevalent in the West. If horse shoes were hung at the door for good luck in the west, the shoe or the sole of the shoe in the East is considered the most ignominious object. Shoes are hurled at dogs.

A person at the height of his rage strikes the object of his hatred by blaring out "my shoe" to express his hatred for the object or person in question. Women are also thoughtful and have used their shoes to strike the pate of their chasers to mitigate lascivious adventurism out of their deluded minds and put them back in the right frame of mind. The hardcore attitude is difficult to subdue. It surfaces at times when the energy of muscles and mind joins hands to execute vocal combinations in the most eloquent way. Not surprisingly, boots seemed to be best couriers of such hooting journalists.

The concept that 'East is East and West is West and the twain shall never meet' has been vaporized by globalization. The global village necessitates a thorough overhaul of attitudes. Unilateralism, be it dictatorial because of its overriding assertiveness, fails to convince the nations of the world of its exclusiveness. Democracy becomes the vociferous platform for harmonizing contradictions.

Attitudes come to have an ideological color when individuality is smothered, and unilateralism fails to impose its will on others through 'weapons of mass distraction' and destruction. It is at this stage that the hidden attitude of the nations strikes.
Nobody among nations of the world, even the most merciless, would like to kill unless they have married the devil itself. The supreme dignity of the human being cannot be preserved by towers and tanks but by an abiding law of humanity that reaches out to their souls. In the absence of this, the culture of boots with hoots will continue to take deeper roots.

Arrogance abetted by claims of superiority along with an apathetic brand of crisp political hostility cannot bridge the gap nor heal the existing wounds, and old suspicions will continue to simmer, brew and grow. Evil prevails and the quicksand of pessimism continues to suck in more and more people in its viscous ocean of doubt and suspicion. But there is always room for optimism.

The victory of Barack Obama in the November 2008 Elections seems to have been inspired and propelled by the desire for change. The American people also seem to have shown that values are the real power behind a nation. They as a people seem to have overcome traditional barriers of religion, race and color. The traditional will of time seems to have subdued the cold old tide of selfishness and American history may have lived up to the ideals preserved in the country's constitution and The American Dream. Now they are expected to post real change in a real sense in the international arena.

Obama has to reverse the old dogmatic trends and deal with a snarling agenda stenciled on the psyche of hawks in Washington. The nerves of nations have been stretched by hollow gestures of goodwill, justice, promises of fair play and human rights, and if the Trojan Horse continues to shred nations then the consequences of this hysterical onslaught will trigger a chain of unpredictable events.

The will of the nations can no longer be mocked. The genie is out of the bottle and only sincere will that rises from the depths of the heart will put things back in the right track. Not new tactics but transparent strategies with human dignity can tame this phenomenon. Mutual respect is the first step in this direction.