Thomas Friedman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

**Thomas L. Friedman**

Born:	July 20, 1953 St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Occupation:	Journalist, author, columnist
Spouse:	Ann Bucksbaum
Website:	thomaslfriedman.com

Thomas Loren Friedman, OBE (born July 20, 1953), is an American journalist, author and a three-time winner of the Pulitzer Prize. He is an op-ed contributor to The New York Times, whose column appears twice weekly and mainly addresses topics on foreign affairs. Friedman is known for supporting a compromise resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, modernization of the Arab world, environmentalism and globalization. His books discuss various aspects of international politics from a neoliberal perspective on the American political spectrum.

1 Early life
2 Career
3 Opinion and stances
4 Controversies and Criticisms
5 Personal life
6 Published works
- 6.1 Bibliography
7 Documentaries
8 References
9 External links
- 9.1 Viewpoints

[edit] Early life

Thomas Friedman was born in St. Louis Park, Minnesota, a suburb of Minneapolis. As a child, he once attended a Jewish summer camp where Abe Foxman was a counselor. In high school, he wrote articles for his school's newspaper,^[1] including one for which he interviewed Ariel Sharon, an Israeli general who later became Prime Minister of Israel.

In 1975, Friedman received a bachelor of arts in Mediterranean studies from Brandeis University, where he first arrived as a transfer student in 1973. He then attended St Antony's College at the University of Oxford on a Marshall scholarship, earning a master of arts in Middle Eastern studies. He names Professor Albert Hourani among his important academic influences.

[edit] Career

Upon graduating, Friedman joined the London bureau of United Press International. He was dispatched a year later to Beirut, where he stayed until 1981. He was then hired by The New York Times as a reporter, and was redispatched to Beirut at the start of the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon. Friedman's coverage of the war, particularly the Sabra and Shatila massacre, ^[2] won him the Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting. With David K. Shipler, he also won the 1982 George Polk Award for Foreign Reporting.

He was assigned to Jerusalem from 1984 to 1988, and received a second Pulitzer Prize for his coverage of the First Palestinian Intifada. Afterwards he wrote a book, From Beirut to Jerusalem, describing his experiences in the Middle East.

Friedman covered Secretary of State James Baker during the administration of United States President George H. W. Bush. Following the election of Bill Clinton in 1992, he became the White House correspondent for the Times. In 1994, he began to write more about foreign policy and economics, and moved to the op-ed page of The New York Times the following year as a foreign affairs columnist.

He made a cameo appearance in the 2006 teen flick John Tucker Must Die.

Friedman is the recipient of the 2004 Overseas Press Club Award for lifetime achievement, and has been named to the Order of the British Empire by Queen Elizabeth II.

[edit] Opinion and stances

[edit] Globalization

The neutrality or factuality of this article or section may be compromised by weasel words.
You can help Wikipedia by improving weasel-worded statements.

Further information: The World is Flat and The Lexus and the Olive Tree

Friedman first discussed his views on globalization in the 1999 book, The Lexus and the Olive Tree. In 2004, a visit to Bangalore and Beijing gave Friedman new insights into the continuing trends of globalization and the forces behind the process, leading him to write a follow-up analysis, The World Is Flat.

One of Friedman's theses is that individual countries must sacrifice some degree of economic sovereignty to global institutions (such as capital markets and multinational corporations) in order to achieve the economic prosperity of the Western world. He termed these restrictions the "Golden Straitjacket."

While Friedman is an advocate of globalization, he also points out (in The Lexus and the Olive Tree) the need for a country to preserve its local traditions even as it globalizes, a process he termed "glocalization".

Friedman expresses a strong stance on America's need to become more energy independent and to lead in technologies concerning environmental compatibility. He believes this will cause the authoritarian rulers in the Middle East to be coerced out of power as their petrodollars deplete, by a growing and albeit distressed youth population. He believes this is the key to spreading stability and modernization in an autocratic and theocratic region. Friedman also argues that energy independence will strengthen America's economy by basing its energy infrastructure on domestic products, and ease the world tensions caused by burgeoning energy demand, exacerbated by emerging economies such as those of India and China.

Friedman's position on globalization through free trade has been criticized as being based on faith, rather than fact or data research. He has been quoted as saying "I wrote a column supporting CAFTA. I didn't even know what was in it. I just knew two words: free trade."^[3]

A criticism of Friedman is that he does not consider the purchasing power of domestic labor as a key driver in economic output. However, Friedman argues that by exporting low-skill and low-wage jobs to foreign countries, more advanced and higher-skilled jobs will be freed up and made available for those displaced by the outsourcing. He theorizes that as long as those whose jobs are outsourced continue to further their education and specialize in their field, they will find better-paying and higher-skilled jobs.

[edit] Terrorism

After the September 11, 2001 attacks, Friedman's writing focused more on the threat of terrorism and the Middle East. He was awarded the 2002 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary "for his clarity of vision, based on extensive reporting, in commenting on the worldwide impact of the terrorist threat". These columns were collected and published in the book Longitudes and Attitudes. For a while, his reportings on post-9/11 topics lead him to diverge from his prior interests on technological advances and globalization, until he began to research for The World Is Flat.

After the 7 July 2005 London bombings, Friedman called for the U.S. State Department to "shine a spotlight on hate speech wherever it appears," create a quarterly "War of Ideas Report, which would focus on those religious leaders and writers who are inciting violence against others." Friedman said the governmental speech monitoring should go beyond those who actually advocate violence, and also include what former State Department spokesperson Jamie Rubin calls "excuse makers." In his 25 July column, Friedman wrote against the "excuses" made by terrorists or apologists who blame their actions on third-party influences or pressures.

After every major terrorist incident, the excuse makers come out to tell us...why the terrorists acted. These excuse makers are just one notch less despicable than the terrorists and also deserve to be exposed. When you live in an open society like London, where anyone with a grievance can publish an article, run for office or start a political movement, the notion that blowing up a busload of innocent civilians in response to Iraq is somehow "understandable" is outrageous. "It erases the distinction between legitimate dissent and terrorism" Mr. Rubin said, "and an open society needs to maintain a clear wall between them."

[edit] Kosovo War

During the 1999 NATO bombing in Yugoslavia, Friedman wrote the following in The New York Times:

"Like it or not, we are at war with the Serbian nation (the Serbs certainly think so), and the stakes have to be very clear: Every week you ravage Kosovo is another decade we will set your country back by pulverizing you. You want 1950? We can do 1950. You want 1389? We can do 1389 too."^[4]

These statements were criticized by British media analysts David Edwards and David Cromwell, who wrote "The thrill of this for Friedman lies in discussing the devastation of a nation as if he were a salesman offering a range of services."^[5] Journalist Chris Floyd described the comments as "giddy cheerleading" and a "bone-chilling warning to the people of Serbia". ^[6]

[edit] War in Iraq

Friedman supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq, writing that the establishment of a democratic state in the Middle East would force other countries in the region to liberalize and modernize. In his February 9, 2003 column for The New York Times, Friedman also pointed to the lack of compliance with the United Nations Security Council Resolution regarding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction:

The French position is utterly incoherent. The inspections have not worked yet, says Mr. de Villepin, because Saddam has not fully cooperated, and, therefore, we should triple the number of inspectors. But the inspections have failed not because of a shortage of inspectors. They have failed because of a shortage of compliance on Saddam's part, as the French know. The way you get that compliance out of a thug like Saddam is not by tripling the inspectors, but by tripling the threat that if he does not comply he will be faced with a U.N.-approved war. ^[7]

Since the invasion, Friedman has expressed alarm over the post-invasion conduct of the war by the George W. Bush administration. Nevertheless, until his piece dated August 4, 2006 (see below), his columns remained hopeful to the possibility of a positive conclusion to the Iraq conflict (although his optimism appeared to steadily diminish as the conflict continued).

In January 2004, he participated in a forum on Slate.com called "Liberal Hawks Reconsider the Iraq War", in which he dismisses the justification for war based on Iraq's lack of compliance with the U.N. Resolutions:

The stated reason for the war was that Saddam Hussein had developed weapons of mass destruction that posed a long-term threat to America. I never bought this argument… The WMD argument was hyped by George Bush and Tony Blair to try to turn a war of choice into a war of necessity.^[8]

Friedman wrote that regime change was the proper justification for the war:

The right reason for this war, as I argued before it started, was to oust Saddam's regime and partner with the Iraqi people to try to implement the Arab Human Development report's prescriptions in the heart of the Arab world. That report said the Arab world is falling off the globe because of a lack of freedom, women's empowerment, and modern education. The right reason for this war was to partner with Arab moderates in a long-term strategy of dehumiliation and redignification.^[8]

In his New York Times , September 29, 2005 column, Friedman entertained the idea of supporting the Kurds and Shias in a civil war against the Sunnis:

If they [the Sunnis] won't [come around], we should arm the Shiites and Kurds and leave the Sunnis of Iraq to reap the wind.^[9]

In his August 4, 2006 column for The New York Times, Friedman finally stated that the effort to transform Iraq by military invasion had failed, and that it was time for the United States to admit failure and disengage:

Whether for Bush reasons or Arab reasons, democracy is not emerging in Iraq, and we can’t throw more good lives after good lives.^[10]

However, Friedman wrote that oil companies are the real "bad guys":

ExxonMobil –- I think this is a real group of bad guys, considering that they have funded all the anti-global-warming propaganda out there in the world. ... They are bad, bad guys – because of what they are doing in fighting the science of global warming..^[11]

[edit] Controversies and Criticisms

[edit] Accusations of bias

He is also known for his denigrating remarks against Arabs and Arab world:

[Thomas Friedman is]...regularly denigrating Arabs for their qualities of emotionalism, unreason, and hostility to democracy and modernization. His classic remark, in the same interview in which he lauds the proxy terrorism model, was that we mustn’t go too far in forcing Palestinian concessions because, “I believe that as soon as Ahmed has a seat in the bus, he will limit his demands.”

[edit] Shifting opinions

He is also accused of flip-flopping:

Writing recently on Iraq, Friedman has outdone himself in ennobling the invasion-occupation. We came there “with the sole intention of liberating its people” and we are fighting for Iraq’s “sovereignty” (“Worried Optimism On Iraq,” NYT, September 21, 2003). ... On Tim Russert’s CNBC program of September 13, Friedman gave a different version of U.S. motivation. It turns out that WMDs and the “moral reason” were not the “real reason,” which Friedman explained as follows: “There were three great bubbles in the 1990s: the Nasdaq bubble, the Enron bubble…and the terrorism bubble.” The terrorism bubble is illustrated by the 9/11 event and “blowing up Israelis in pizza-parlors”—not the “sanctions of mass destruction” or Sharon’s policies that were killing three Palestinians for each dead Israeli. Lots of Arabs believed in this bubble and, “We need to go into the heart of their world and beat their brains out, in order to burst this bubble.” We’ve done that with the invasion of Iraq and “the people in the neighborhood got it, all right.” So the Bush war was not for liberation after all and certainly not to control Iraqi oil and project U.S. power for U.S. (and Israeli) interests. It was to “stop terrorism.” This is occasionally claimed by the Bush team and its supporters, but no credible analyst accepts it as a motive and the non-Bush-affiliated analysts almost uniformly argue that the Iraq war will stimulate anti-U.S. feeling and terrorism.

All quotes from: "The NYT's Thomas Friedman - The Geraldo Rivera of the NYT" By Edward S. Herman The NYT's Thomas Friedman

[edit] "The next six months"

Critics of Friedman's position on the Iraq War have noted his recurrent assertion that "the next six months" will prove critical in determining the outcome of the conflict. A study by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting first pointed out this phenomenon in May 2006, citing several examples of Friedman declaring "the next six months" as a decisive or critical period, dating from in November 2003, describing it as "a long series of similar do-or-die dates that never seem to get any closer." [3]

In a live television interview aired 11 June 2006 on CNN, noted media-observer and TV host Howard Kurtz asked Friedman himself about the concept: "Now, I want to understand how a columnist’s mind works when you take positions, because you [Tom Friedman] were chided recently for writing several times on different occasions: 'the next six months are crucial in Iraq,' 'the next six months.' " [4] The blogger Atrios coined the neologism "Friedman" to refer to this unit of time in relation to Iraq, noting its use as a supposedly critical window of opportunity by other supporters of the war.

[edit] Personal life

Friedman is married to Ann Bucksbaum, an economist and a graduate of Stanford University.^[12] Bucksbaum's father, Matthew Bucksbaum, is the chairman of the board of General Growth Properties, a real estate development group he co-founded with his brother in 1954. The Bucksbaums helped pioneer the development of shopping centers in the United States.^[13] As of 2005, Forbes estimated the Bucksbaum family's assets at $2.7 billion, including about 18.6 million square meters of mall space.^[14]

Ann and Thomas Friedman live in Bethesda, Maryland, a suburb of Washington, D.C. The July 2006 issue of Washingtonian magazine reported that they own "a palatial 11,400-square-foot house, now valued at $9.3 million, on a 7½-acre parcel just blocks from I-495 and Bethesda Country Club." The Friedmans have two daughters: Orly Friedman (b. 1985), who attends Yale University; and Natalie Friedman (b. 1988), who attends Williams College. Both were born in Israel while Friedman served as a correspondent for The New York Times.^[15] Friedman has dedicated many of his published works to his daughters.

[edit] Published works

Original cover of The World Is Flat

Friedman's books have seen considerable commercial success. His latest book, The World Is Flat, has been on the New York Times Best Seller list since its publication in April 2005. Since July 2006, the book has sold more than two million copies.

[edit] Bibliography

The World Is Flat: A Brief History Of The Twenty-first Century (2005) ISBN
Longitudes and Attitudes: Exploring the World After September 11 (2002) ISBN
The Lexus and the Olive Tree (1999) ISBN
From Beirut to Jerusalem (1989) ISBN, (updated 1990) ISBN

[edit] Documentaries

Friedman has also hosted several documentaries for the Discovery Channel from various locations around the world. In "Straddling the Fence" (2003), he visited the West Bank and spoke to Israelis and Palestinians about the Israeli West Bank barrier and its impact on their lives. Also in 2003, "Thomas L. Friedman Reporting: Searching for the Roots of 9-11" aired on the Discovery Times Channel. This program investigated the reason for Muslim hatred of the United States, and how the Sept. 11th attacks in New York, Pennsylvania, and the Pentagon were viewed in the Muslim world.

In "The Other Side of Outsourcing" (2004), he visited a call center in Bangalore, interviewing the young Indians working there, and then traveled to an impoverished rural part of India, where he debated the pros and cons of globalization with locals (this trip spawned his eventual bestselling book "The World is Flat").

In "Does Europe Hate Us?" (2005), Friedman traveled through Britain, France and Germany, talking with academics, journalists, Marshall and Rhodes scholars, young Muslims and others about the nature of the strained relationship between Europe and the United States. Friedman's most recent documentary, "Addicted to Oil" premiered at the Silverdocs Film Festival at 5:30 PM on June 16, 2006, and aired on June 24, 2006, at 10 p.m. ET on the Discovery Times Channel. In it he examines the geopolitical, economic, and environmental consequences of petroleum use and ways that green technologies such as alternative fuels and energy, efficiency, and conservation can reduce oil dependence.