To be Arab
From the Arab press, Dina Ezzat learns much about the price of being an Arab and a Muslim in today's world
Click to view caption |
The cover photo of the weekly Al-Majallafeatures the Levys, a secular Jewish lawyer and his two Muslim daughters from a previous marriage. The family is going to court after the sisters were banned from wearing the hijab in their French school; From the Qatari daily Al-Raiya comes ridicule towards Arab governments who limit the use of their tanks to simply announcing the end of the fast in Ramadan
|
"A Jew and his two Muslim daughters defy the French government over the right to wear the hijab in French schools". That was the headline on this week's cover of the weekly magazine Al-Majalla.
The story is about Laurent Levy and Laila and Alma Levy. Levy, a French secular Jewish lawyer, is going to court to force the French government to lift a ban on the wearing of the hijab, the Islamic head scarf, in government schools. His objective is to allow his two devout daughters to wear their head scarves in school.
Laila and Alma's mother is a secular Algerian. Their religious upbringing was the work of their Algerian maternal grandmother who took them in after their parents divorced.
"It was six months ago that they decided to don the veil. It is their right... their headcovers do not harm anyone in or out of school," Levy was quoted as saying in several Arab publications.
The story of the Levys is one example of several other stories that were carried this week by the Arab press about the status of Muslims and Arabs in Western communities as well as in Arab and Muslim countries.
Other stories included another court battle of another Muslim schoolgirl, this one in Oklahoma in the US, over attending school with her hair covered.
They also included opinion pieces about the future of Arab and Muslim communities in the West, especially in the US, and their growing role in affecting political and social developments in their societies. Indeed, the Arab press had several stories to offer on the various forms of discrimination being practiced against Muslims and Arabs and foreigners of Muslim and Arab origin, particularly in the US and Europe -- all controversial issues.
Most controversial of all perhaps was the story from Malaysia, the venue of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) summit. Addressing the gathering, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed said Muslims were being victimised by Jews who he added, "rule the world by proxy".
Mahathir's remarks, the angry reactions it prompted in the West and the comments it inspired in the Arab and Muslim world were carried by the Arab press which seemed for the most part to sympathise with the prime minister.
Several opinion pieces did what many Arab and Muslims officials did: defend Mahathir of charges by Israeli and Western officials of being anti-Semitic. For some commentators, Mahathir's remarks were meant as alarm bells to wake up the Muslim world which, they added, needed to put its act together and respond to the many challenges emanating from Israel and its allies in key world capitals, particularly Washington.
On Saturday, Abdel-Bari Atwan, editor-in-chief of the London- based daily Al-Quds Al-Arabi, dedicated his article to defending Mahathir. "Mahathir Mohamed is the victim of a terrorist attack by Israeli, US and European officials. Prompting this hate campaign was a part of his address to the OIC summit in which he criticised the monopoly Jews have in international decision-making to foment anti-Muslim hatred," Atwan wrote.
According to Atwan's article that appeared under the headline, "Mahathir's bombs", there is absolutely nothing wrong -- or for that matter unfair -- in Mahathir's remarks. He argued that it was Israel which instigated the White House war against Iraq just as much as it is promoting American anger at Syria and Iran, let alone the overall unfair US foreign policy in the Arab-Israeli conflict.
For Atwan, it was absurd for Western officials, especially the Europeans, to accuse the prime minister of Malaysia of exercising anti- Semitism. "It is the Europeans who persecuted the Jews and burned six million of them alive. It is the Europeans who confiscated the properties of Jews. And it was the Europeans who then decided to export the problem to the Middle East where Muslims, Jews and followers of all religions were living for years in peace and dignity," Atwan wrote.
This said, Atwan blamed the Malaysian prime minister for generalising. According to Atwan, it is wrong to ignore the fact that there are Jews who observe the highest standards of moral values and who have the courage to condemn Israel for its racist policies against the Palestinians.
Elsewhere in the Arab press, Mohamed was subjected to criticism, albeit mild. In the Lebanese daily Al-Anwar, Rafiq Khouri on Monday blamed the Malaysian prime minister for falling into the trap of reducing the Arab-Israeli conflict, as well as the battle between the developed and underdeveloped countries, to one of inter-faith intolerance. "This is a tried and trusted recipe for an eternal struggle," Khouri said. According to Khouri, Mahathir could have easily and legitimately criticised the failure of the Muslim world -- which happens to include many non-Muslims -- for its underdevelopment and lack of political influence.
For Khouri, Mahathir did not need to play the same tune as that of Osama Bin Laden who, he added, divides the world into "Muslims versus Crusaders and Jews".
While Mahathir was subjected to harsh criticism from the West for his remarks, some Western officials made similar remarks but got away with it. On Monday, the Syrian paper Al-Thawra criticised the Bush administration for saying almost exactly what Mahathir had said -- but against Muslims. Prompting the criticism was a statement by US Secretary of State Colin Powell who was quoted by many quarters in the Syrian press as suggesting that the US is "Christian Jewish country".
Was this statement by Powell a mere slip of the tongue? asked Aref Al-Agha in Al-Thawra. Al-Agha answered his own question: probably not. According to Al-Agha, Powell is not the only member of the Bush administration who exercises what he termed the "Israelisation" of US policies.
Al-Agha also quoted Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld as saying "we fought the Iraq war for the sake of Israel". And he quoted Condoleezza Rice, the US national security advisor, as saying that "the security of the world stems from the security of Israel." Agha wrote that it was, therefore, perfectly normal for the US president himself to call Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, despite his well-documented record of brutality against Palestinians, as "a man of peace".
For Al-Agha the bias of US foreign policy regarding the Middle East and many Muslim countries, including Iran, must be seen within the context of Israel's influence over the present administration. "The Israelisation of US foreign policy, in theory and in practice, and the consequent anti-Arab and anti-Muslim sentiments prevailing in the US administration, have encouraged Israeli aggressiveness and indifference towards international law and UN resolutions."
The hijacking by Israel of the Bush administration's foreign policy was frequently referred to this week in articles criticising the remarks by Richard Pearl, former advisor to the US secretary of defence, who was quoted as saying "Israel waited too long before hitting Syria..." and "the US could always send troops to occupy Syria despite its many obligations in Iraq."
Also published in the Arab press as an indicator of the Israeli influence over US policy on the Middle East were statements made by Israeli Minister of Defence Shaul Mofaz who publicly objected to Washington's intention to sell arms to Egypt which, he said, was enlarging its army in worrying fashion.
Parallel to this debate was another about anti-Muslim remarks made by a high-ranking US military official who did not hesitate to call Muslims "followers of Satan" and who did not even need to apologise. Lt Gen William Boykin did say, "I am not an extremist and have nothing against any religion," but only after Arab and Muslim organisations in the US took him to task for the remarks.
"Those statements made by Boykin are indicative of his ignorance and racism. This statement, in and by itself, is enough to do enormous damage to the image of the US in the Arab and Muslim world" where Washington is spending money to improve its image, commented Ahmed Al-Raba'i, a columnist in the Saudi-financed, London-based daily Asharq Al-Awsat on Monday.
It was, therefore, no surprise for the readers of Arab dailies that are covering the campaigns of candidates for the US presidency to learn that Democratic candidate Joseph Lieberman, Al Gore's former running mate and who is a Jew, was chastised for being anti-Arab and too pro-Israeli. According to stories filed to the Arab dailies from Detroit, Michigan, the heartland of Arab Americans, Arab-Americans do not want to see the current administration replaced, no matter how pro- Israeli and anti-Arab it is, with another that might be worse.
Meanwhile, some Arab commentators felt obliged to warn Arabs and Muslims not to hope for a change in US policy towards Arabs and Muslims even if the present administration were to lose the elections. In a two-part series published by Asharq Al-Awsat on Friday and Saturday, prominent columnist Abdul-Rahman Al-Rashid cautioned those who are "dreaming that Bush fails". According to Al- Rashid, it is naive to think that when Bush leaves the White House, "if he does at all go away, the new president will immediately opt for a more even-handed foreign policy approach that would do justice to Arabs and Muslims."
Far from politics, as the holy month of Ramadan nears, Arab papers, dailies and weeklies published related features that described the traditions belonging to the month as observed in Muslim countries.
On Sunday, Al-Quds Al-Arabi published a feature story from Cairo about the prices of Ramadan-related products -- nuts and dried fruits often sold in large quantities during the month. The story, called, "War of prices of Ramadan fare", reported a shocking increase in the prices of these mostly imported commodities.
Stores were giving odd names to these commodities, too. The most expensive brand of dates received the tag Shakira, after the sultry pop singer. Sharong is the least expensive brand and by all accounts the poorest in quality. And a half-and-half brand goes by the name Chirac.
