27 Dec. 2001 - 2 Jan. 2002
Issue No.566
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 27 Dec. 2001 - 2 Jan. 2002 Issue No.566 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Stepping down
Sir- Please excuse any impertinence for my suggestion, but perhaps the time has come for Mr Arafat to step down and become a Living Treasure, and for Mr Edward Said to assume his mantle. Mr Said is well respected, known, and versatile in the ways of the West and the East. I offer this suggestion because I see the Israelis take centre stage (again) and do not feel Mr Arafat is up to anything more than just preserving his reputation, but not the authenticity of the Palestinian nation.
Barbra-renee Brighenti
Sarasota, Florida
US
Kill, don't execute
Sir- Donald Rumsfeld stated: "The Arab fighters have a choice, either surrender or be killed." He did not state that they should be executed. The US does not violate the Geneva Convention. We were attacked and have every right to defend ourselves. Religious fundamentalism is a threat in every society, whether Christian or Muslim. People who reject modernity and interpret the Bible or Qur'an literally tie religion and hatred together. Your newspaper does not help the situation, as so-called intellectuals (journalists) encourage this behaviour.
Allan Bevere
New Jersey
US
Begging the question
Sir- I suppose to be naive enough to say that one understands the Middle East question suggests that one did not understand the question in the first place. However, I greatly value the editorials and opinions printed in your pages. They give me a far better understanding than anything I read which is printed in England or definitely across your borders to the east. Thank you and please continue your good work.
Bill Cloney
Wirral
UK
A small bone
Sir- The actions of Prime Minister Sharon in light of the recent suicide bombings are inexcusable and disgusting. What the Sharon administration fails to realise is that the Palestinians are looking for freedom, not violence, and that Arafat is not responsible for the attacks. Sharon is trying to make a sudden grab for power, as well as the ability to push the Palestinians into submission, and hopefully his dirty little hand will get burnt. It is unfortunate that the Jews have not had a homeland for so long, but their government fails to understand that the Palestinians need one as well. It appears, by their own fault, that Israeli conservatives such as Binyamin Netanhayu and Ariel Sharon are cold-blooded people who can be compared to people such as Slobodan Milosevic and other human rights violators. Recently the Bush administration made comments in support of a Palestinian state, and it is disappointing that they have failed to act, considering the fact that the Palestinians are going to lose what little leverage they have. The fact is that if the Palestinians were just thrown a small concessionary bone, as well as ending the Sharon administration's bigotry, the violence probably could be ended for a short while, while a long-term solution to the problem can be considered.
Matthew Cunningham Cook
Vermont
US
Dead end
Sir- It is indeed curious that Edward Said's article, "Israel's dead end" (Al-Ahram Weekly, 20- 26 December), goes to great lengths to mention the Israel strike against Hamas leader Mahmoud Abu Hanoud. Yet, he makes no mention at all of the preceding assassination of the Israeli cabinet minister that preceded Mahmoud Abu Hanoud's death by approximately two weeks. Instead, Mr Said states that Israel intentionally provoked Hamas after "a 10 day lull." This intentional oversight is intended to portray only the struggles of the Palestinian people, without examining the cause and effect relationship. In fact, Mr Said chastises Israel's use of the term "terrorists" against Hamas. But what else can you call a group involved with calculated assassination? Clearly, both sides are wrong. Both the Israelis and the Palestinians retaliated for what they perceived as "acts of terrorism" against their people. It is, however, a shame that Mr Said chooses to blindly see one side of the issue.
Kevin Donahue
Fort Worth, Texas
US
Reforming Islam
Sir- The US government is helpless and frustrated with its own impotence to solve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict once and for all using American pragmatism because of the religious based blind support of influential American Jews. Secularism in the Arab countries represent a threat to Israel because it will no longer be the only favourite nation for the West and the Americans to support and invest in. Continued Israeli aggression in the Middle East ensures the widespread sympathy for radical Islamic extremism as an option or solution which intimidate the West perpetually (a vicious circle). The Arab world should adopt measures to control and reform Islamic theology and teachings taking in consideration the old model of Islamic civilisation for tolerance and promotion of art, science and reason. Religion and politics should be separated completely, especially government supported institutions, e.g. Al-Azhar. The Arab countries should not seek approval or support from religious figures.
Fawzy Salama
New York
US
Entrenched opinions
Sir- I am amazed by the intelligence of Edward Said, and I am also amazed by his inability to conduct an argument that might somehow convince any of us not already entrenched on one side or the other. Mr Said needs to understand that Americans do not accept the concept of "justifiable terrorism," as in "those teenagers at the mall died because of Israeli occupation and aggression." We do not accept it any more than the "justifiable terrorism" of thousands murdered by Mr Bin Laden for the "American occupation of Islamic Holy Lands." If Mr Said wishes to speak only to the choir, then he is doing a fine job and should not change a word. If, on the other hand, Mr Said would like to convince the great number of us sickened by the actions of both sides to the conflict, then he'd better reconsider his rhetoric.
The problem, in reality, is that both sides have adopted a sort of silly, macho attitude of "You started it and you're worse than I am -- so I'm justified in doing whatever I want." This attitude is only serving to get a lot of innocent people killed and it is this attitude that Mr Said continues to foster. He is, I believe, an excellent writer and an extremely intelligent individual, but I also believe this attitude is not healthy for innocent people on both sides of the border.
Max Flores
Mexico City
Mexico
Sports are the solution
Sir- I have just begun to read your paper because of heightened interest in the affairs of the Middle East after the 11 September attacks. I thank you for it. I realise from reading your paper that it is pointless to take a position that questions the behaviour of the Palestinians in the Arab-Israeli conflict, but there is one set of recurring images that disturbs me: we always see media images of children throwing stones at tanks. That means that the Palestinians are sending children out to fight an adult war. I think that this is a callous act that makes all of their rhetoric about Israelis killing innocent children seem empty and hollow. And when those children get hurt or killed, of course -- it is Israel's fault. There is no way that the Palestinian Authority or any responsible parents and other adults can be justified for allowing those children to be out there throwing those stones. It demonstrates that those children's lives have no value and that the children are being used by adults for their own selfish aims. Those children should be playing and not fighting an adult war.
The last statement actually gets me to my main point: I noticed also that your sports section consists of one, single solitary sport -- football. That's it? What would your world be like, what would your children be doing if they had the wide array of sports activities available in other societies? Sports generate their own economy by providing both entertainment and employment. They channel aggressive energies and they create aspirations for young adults other than martyrdom. Maybe Palestinian children would not be out tossing rocks at tanks and getting killed if a wider array of sports activities were available. Maybe young Arab men would not turn to jihad for thrills. Maybe they would learn more about cooperation and teamwork for purposes other than to kill their enemies. Maybe Arabs and Israelis could meet on more playing fields instead of battlefields, as idealistic as that sounds.
I am sure that everybody has a "solution" for the Arab world these days. Not that you need one, because your world seems to work just fine, except for the occasional suicide bomber thing. But here is my suggestion: a wider offering of organised sports to young men. You have probably heard all of this before or considered it yourselves. But again: one sport in your "sports" section? If I did not fear the wrath of the Muslim world, I would say that it is laughable. Maybe that is the only sport that you report, and there are actually many more. If so, why do you ignore them?
Cecil Moore
Boston, Massachusetts
US
Out of context
Sir- I read with interest the article by Amr Elshoubaki on the "context" of radical Arab violence (Al-Ahram Weekly, 20-26 December). He is bylined as an "expert" in political affairs at the Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, but what I read was yet another sad polemic against America without a shred of evidence to support it. A better article on the context of Arab-American relations might ask the question: Why is it that the vast majority of Americans perceive the constant blaming of America only as Arab lies and propaganda? The answer is quite simple: These so-called Arab commentators do not (cannot?) document the so-called evil doings of American policy. And without evidence of these claims, Americans assume that the claims are falsehoods.
Elshoubaki's article is a case in point. First he complains of pressure from "the US-led global order on all national and cultural entities," a pressure that is so powerful that it forces Arab reformers to turn away from their more natural home-grown targets. Yet Elshoubaki cannot provide even one instance of such an American-led conspiracy against all nations. Next he talks about "Washington's repression of all forms of peaceful or legitimate protest in many parts of the Arab Islamic world," yet again cannot provide a single example of Washington actually clamping down on such peaceful protest. Then, in one of his most anti-American thoughts, he says "it is Washington that should apologise to Tehran for the terrorist acts inflicted on the Iranian people under the Shah," when he refuses to document any such terrorist act that was actually caused by Washington, and when he ignores the one terrorist act that remains seared into the minds of all Americans: the fundamentalist kidnapping and torture of American diplomats at our embassy in Tehran.
The same faulty presentation is made in Elshoubaki's comments about Palestine. Again, he blames America without providing any facts or evidence to bolster his case. There has never been any "sorry litany of constantly demeaning the struggle" from a Washington administration that I can ever recall. I have never read a Washington official say that the Palestinians and Israelis had achieved "equal strength and rights."
Without evidence to support him, Elshoubaki's article is easily viewed in America as more misguided radical rhetoric that plays right into the hands of the Bin Ladens of the world. America is not Imperial Rome. And Americans are not so easily duped by propaganda. If Arabs are upset with their native governments, why blame America? If Palestinians are upset that Israel uses American guns, why also blame America? After all, a lot of Arab states use American guns too, and you didn't see Israeli terrorists blow up the Kremlin when Syria and Egypt used Soviet guns, did you? This whole blame-America-first nonsense is just an excuse for the more radical Arabs who refuse to face up to their own impotence. They have been blocked from the paths of power in their own countries, so they seek personal power through extra-national and extra-secular means, rallying Arabs to their cause by warring not against other Arabs, but against other peoples. It's a form of religious and racist jingoism. But if Elshoubaki still wants to make a case against America, I'd suggest he first respond to a common American slang phrase: Show me!
Luther Ray
Chicago, Illinois
US
A context for poverty
Sir- In "A question of context" (Al-Ahram Weekly, 20-26 December), Amr Elshoubaki says that the West, meaning the US, needs to examine the role it has played in creating terrorist groups in the Muslim world. Believe me, many Americans are doing just that, Edward Said, Susan Sontag and Noam Chomsky, to name a few. However, these writers have a long history of playing loose with the facts, building their cases on half-truths and exaggerations, and ignoring important historical events. As a result, they have lost credibility with most Americans and are viewed simply as clowns. It's fun to watch their pyrotechnics, but only a few college freshman take them seriously.
Nevertheless, Mr Elshoubaki caused me to wonder why Muslim countries don't do some serious self-analysis. Why doesn't someone ask "Why are Muslim countries among the poorest in the world?" or "Why do most Muslim countries have the most oppressive governments in the world?" or "Why are Arab and Muslim countries becoming poorer each year instead of wealthier, like many Asian and Latin American countries?" I recently read in the Iranian government newspaper, Iran Daily, that per capita income in the country has fallen by two-thirds since the revolution in 1978. Two-thirds! This information comes from the Iranian government, not the CIA! Yet, no one in the Muslim world has a problem with the mullahs of Iran destroying two-thirds of the nation's wealth. And Iran isn't alone. Look at the figures from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) or the UN or the World Bank or anyone! Arab and Muslim countries are falling behind, growing poorer every year while the rest of the world, especially Asia and Latin America, are getting richer. How many Arab/Muslim writers have wondered about that?
Roger D McKinney
Tulsa, Oklahoma
US
The other's accounts
Sir- I would like to congratulate you for an excellent online newspaper that gives an objective overview of the tragedy befalling our people in Palestine. I just saw your newspaper online minutes ago and I would like to convey my deep admiration for it. I would like it if you were able to add excerpts from Israeli newspapers such as Ha'aretz and Maarev to your newspaper. Some of the reporters who write in such publications are giving one of the best, most objective accounts of what is happening in Palestine. This will show Egyptian readers as well as the world the true events occurring in the region in the words of Israelis themselves.
Maher N Younes
Houston, Texas
US
Christian criminals
Sir- Let's all remember that Hitler and Nazi Germany were not Muslims but came from a Christian background. Let's also remember that Joseph Stalin and his army in the former USSR also came from a Christian background. Let's not forget the long and bloody history of Christianity in the Middle Ages. When the Crusaders captured Jerusalem they first killed all the Christians who lived there. When the new immigrants came to America they used smallpox to wipe out all the Native Americans. These are historical facts. I failed to find such incidents in the 1,400 years of Islamic history, even during the height of Islamic power from Spain to China. The only large-scale violent actions of Islamic groups started in the '70s due to the Israeli occupation of Palestine, defined as illegal by the UN yet backed by the American government and media, which since the '60s has been almost totally controlled by the Jewish lobby. Those incidents, furthermore, were backed by groups, not organised states like in World War II.
Otto Rosenbaum
Marburg
Germany
Democratic by name
Sir- As the child of one of the millions of Muslims who have fled India for Pakistan, and as a lecturer in South Asian studies at the University of Toronto, the plight of India's Muslims is close to my heart and mind. Thus, it was wonderful to read "Who listens to Bukhari?" by Mukul Devichand (Al-Ahram Weekly, 20-26 December).
What is most striking about the article is that the spectrum of opinion expressed by the Indian Muslim intellectuals quoted -- from "liberal" Mushir ul-Hassan to "conservative" Imam Bukhari -- is often echoed by their Pakistani counterparts. From "secular nationalism" to "pan-Islamic jihad," coverage of the on-going war in Afghanistan has shown that Pakistani intellectuals abide by analogous, if not identical, intellectual tropes. This being the case, Friedman's "lesson" -- that Muslims in India are "thriving" due to India's "pluralistic, democratic" political culture -- is wholly untenable. Rather, it can be argued that the similarities between Pakistani and Indian Muslim intellectuals stem from both belonging to societies that neither allow popular representation in government, nor function as "secular" societies. Friedman's assertion that India's "democratic" credentials are earned by naming Muslims to high posts is highly misrepresentative. No one would argue that non-Muslims in Pakistan are well represented in government, yet a long list of non-Muslims in high posts can be compiled, including Supreme Court judges and Cabinet ministers.
Furthermore, as the Durban Conference on racism recently illustrated to the world, "democracy" in India is so "caste-ridden" that low- caste and out-caste Hindus refer to social relations in terms of "Apartheid." Regarding the ability of Muslims to find representation, one must begin by acknowledging that the case of "caste" suggests that class and religion are real factors in the Indian polity, despite Friedman's portrait of a "pluralistic, democratic" society. In terms of class, one would do well to remember that the Indian Muslim opinion represented is of an "elite" variety. Something of the "mass" variety can be gauged from the conditions under which the masses live.
Indian politics is today dominated by "Hindu fundamentalist" organisations such as the VHP, RSS, Shiv Sena, and others, all of whom view Muslims as Mlechhas, the "impure," who are not to be engaged and who have no rights. These organisations have a long history of forcing Muslim conversion to Hinduism (shuddi). As recently as 1986, they attempted to ban the Qur'an in India, besides desecrating mosques as in Ayodhia, and fomenting riots, as in Bombay. Given that Prime Minister Vajpayee and members of his cabinet are drawn from the cadres of such organisations, it can hardly be contended that the average Muslim is represented by Indian "democracy," or that the average Indian lives under a polity "secular" in anything but name.
Reza Pirbhai
University of Toronto,
Canada
Washington's way
Sir- I want to ask every American what s/he would do if tomorrow Mexico attacked and occupy California or Texas just because the Mexicans believe that 3,000 years ago they had a temple in those states where they ate corn. What if Mexico was funded and backed by China or Russia, which give it $3.5 billion a year, provide it with weapons, and use their veto in the UN to block any attempt to end the occupation? Would the American administration or the American people consider those who arm themselves to resist the occupation of their homeland by Mexican settlers and the Mexican occupation army as terrorist?
If a terrorist is a Palestinian who lost 78 per cent of his home land to the Jewish immigrants in 1948 and is now struggling for the 22 per cent (West Bank and Gaza) that remain, and who lives under Israeli military occupation, then George Washington, and the French resistance in World War II, should also be considered terrorist too. They also resisted occupation of their country.
Nick Rhodes
Chicago, Illinois
US
Rights and privileges
Sir- As an Egyptian who has lived in the US for the past 20 years, I find it amusing that instead of focusing your anger on the perpetrator of the 11 September attack, you choose to attack the victims for defending themselves and ridding their country of any possible hater of the US or foreign sympathiser with the attackers. Living in America is not a right granted to any Tom, Dick and Harry, it is a privilege, and if anyone living here does not appreciate what this country has to offer them then I believe they have no business living here. Let us see the facts:
1) all the perpetrators were Arabs;
2) all the perpetrators were Muslims;
3) almost all the perpetrators were in the US either on expired visas or on student visas;
4) all the planners of these attacks are Arabs;
5) most of the Arab world responded to this attack by blaming the US and some even by rejoicing in our loss.
6) Mr Hosni Mubarak went on television and maintained lax US policies towards the terrorists in the past were to blame for the attack.
What sane people in the world can condemn the US for its reaction?
Of course our illustrious Arab American lawyers cannot permit the facts to stand in the face of their rhetoric and their 15 minutes of fame, not to talk about the monetary compensation for their "gallant efforts" to protect my civil rights. Thanks but no thanks; as an American of Egyptian origin I take my chance with the Department of Justice and John Ashcroft over the justice systems in the Arab or Muslim world anytime.
Just a suggestion: if those attorneys are sincere in their indignation and anger, why don't they sue Osama and his supporters for defamation of a culture and a religion?
Riad Tadros
California
US
Nowhere on earth
Sir- Interesting to read your articles. Amazing that you do not mention very much the people who died at the hands of the terrorist Atta, and the other murders. Amazing that you do not mention the thousands of children that are now orphans in the New York City metropolitan area. Amazing that you do not mention the victims' families. Amazing that the people who called for sending US troops back home in body bags are now occupying those very same body bags, and their countries are asking for mercy for them. I will not soon forget the acts of the murderers, the acts of evil, the hate they spread, and the death they bring to their own people. Atta and people like him will now see what their deeds will bring the terrorists of the world. They will have no place on the planet to hide.
George Tselentis
US
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page