Readers' corner
Many questions
In 'Complicated tales' ( Al-Ahram Weekly, 5-11 January) Maj-Gen Ahmed Omar of the Ministry of Interior disputed Human Rights Watch's findings about the problem of torture and other serious human rights abuses on the part of Egyptian security forces under the ministry's authority. But he fails to identify a single error or refute any facts in our reports.
Two cases stand out in this regard. Mamdouh Habib is an Australian citizen of Egyptian origin whom the US forcibly transferred to Egypt for six months in late 2001 before taking him to Guantanamo. Omar claims that Habib "came to Egypt for a limited time and left," as if he were passing through of his own volition to visit family. He makes no effort to address Habib's detailed allegations to a US court that Egyptian authorities held him in incommunicado detention for six months during which time they repeatedly beat him and subjected him to electric shocks.
Hassan Mustafa Nasr is an Egyptian who had been living in Italy until CIA officers kidnapped him in Milan and flew him to Egypt in early 2003. Omar makes the claim, against all indications to the contrary, that "he came to Egypt of his own initiative". Omar at least acknowledges in the Weekly that Nasr is now in Egyptian custody, something that the government has until now refused to confirm even in response to requests from Italian authorities. The government has not responded to a formal request from Human Rights Watch to visit Nasr in custody to ascertain the conditions of his interrogation and detention.
Over the past decade, Human Rights Watch has asked the government to investigate numerous cases involving credible allegations of torture during interrogation by the State Security Investigation (SSI) arm of the Interior Ministry. The greatest number of the 137 known cases of death in detention as a result of torture in Egypt between 1993 and July 2005 occurred in the offices of the SSI.
When Human Rights Watch investigated the mass arrests of thousands in northern Sinai following the Taba bombings of October 2004, we repeatedly but unsuccessfully sought meetings with Ministry of Interior officials, and our formal letter of inquiry requesting the ministry's response to credible allegations that between 2,500 and 3,000 people had been arrested went unanswered.
Omar claims in Al-Ahram that following the Taba attacks "the detention procedures were all legal," citing "liberties granted by the emergency law". He ignores the fact that the thousands of detentions in Sinai in 2004 violated even the permissive standards of that law, which require that detained persons be notified promptly in writing of the reasons for their detention and be permitted to contact relatives and seek the aid of an attorney.
Joe Stork
Deputy director of the Middle East and North Africa division of Human Rights Watch
Worth watching
Sir-- Now that the countdown to the AfricanCup of Nations has started the Egyptians are ready to organise the most important sports event in the world after the World Cup. The Egyptians as well as people all over the world will certainly enjoy viewing a fantastic semi- World Cup. It is true that Egypt, as the host country, and also in view of its rich record which is full of African titles, has a good chance to win the cup. However, this does not mean that the other 15 participating African teams will come to Egypt to visit its historical sites. On the contrary, all the teams will come to Egypt to compete for the cup. For example, the Tunisians, the holder of the last African title, will come to Egypt to defend their title. Cameroon, being eliminated from the World Cup 2006, will come to Egypt to compensate their fans. In addition there is Côte d'Ivoire, ranked number one in Africa, and which also qualified for the World Cup for the first time in its history. They will come to Egypt to prove they are no fluke. To sum up, the Pharaohs as well as people all over the world will certainly enjoy a tough tournament worthy of viewing.
Abdel-Hakim Rharbaoui
Rabat
Morocco
When in Rome...
Sir-- Mona Prince's article ('Eagle in America, Al-Ahram Weekly 2-18 January) regarding her trip to Iowa fails to mention that during times of war, security is increased. If I travel to another country and am told not to do x, y or z, I had better not as I am a guest in that land regardless of the situation.
Kerry Winn
Henderson
USA
Do like us
Sir-- Sweetheart, you're a guest in someone's country while traveling for two weeks on their dime ('Eagle in America, Al-Ahram Weekly 12- 18 January). A gracious person would at least try to adhere to the itinerary that serves as the premise of the trip. You're welcome to hit any reservation your spiritual heart desires after you obtain your own tourist visa and pay for your own travel. Quit allowing anti-Americanism to trump common decency.
Andy Cowan
Texas
USA
Seeing the worst
Sir-- This brilliant article ('Eagle in America, Al-Ahram Weekly 12-18 January) depicts what we in the US have been witnessing as the erosion of what is best in the American system under the current administration, which considers itself above the law. It is ordering wire and e- mail taps without any prior court orders, and labeling any voices against its adventuristic policies as unpatriotic. I am extremely saddened by what Ms Mona Prince has been subjected to. This is compounded by the fact that Ms Prince was a guest and invitee of the US and should have been extended all welcoming courtesies. I am also appalled by the actions taken by the IWP director, himself a poet and an academic, and by the US Embassy in Cairo and the US State Department to have allowed the IWP director to terminate Ms Prince's participation in the programme prematurely and be expelled from Iowa city on such short notice with nothing to go by other than that she has exercised her right of speaking against being painted as a criminal and prisoner.
As an American citizen and an academic I am extending my sincere apologies on behalf of all Americans to Ms Prince. I am so glad that this "Good Eagle Woman" stood fast and refused to be intimated into silence.
Fernand Cohen
Philadelphia
USA
Frightening future
Sir-- I find Dina Ezzat's concerns quite realistic ('No quiet on the Eastern front, Al-Ahram Weekly 12-18 January). The replacement of Sharon/ Olmert with Netanyahu, coupled with the rise of Hamas, will mark the triumph of hard-liners on both sides, effectively ending any peace process and inaugurating a period of confrontation which will jeopardise all regional peace treaties. Since Netanyahu opposed the Gaza pullout, he may be willing to reoccupy the area, leading to considerable bloodshed. There may be a massacre, and exodus of Palestinians to Egypt, inflaming passions and effectively dooming the 1979 Egypt- Israel peace treaty.
Tim Donovan
Connecticut
USA
What he left
Sir-- Ramzy Baroud is quick to criticise the lionising of Ariel Sharon in his opinion piece 'Exalting Sharon' ( Al-Ahram Weekly 12-18 January). He rightly points out that Sharon -- and his legacy -- is being praised incessantly to the point where some of his previous actions have been all but forgotten. It is perhaps a little too simplistic to characterise him as a former hard- liner and military man who mellowed in his old age to become a man of peace.
However, in his broad polemic against Mr Sharon and his legacy, Mr Baroud fails to note one major fact -- that it was under Sharon that real constructive movements towards peace have been made after a deadlock of more than a decade and further to that, even with all his criticisms of Sharon, he has failed to offer any other viable solutions to the ongoing conflict besides the actions that Sharon has taken. For the fact remains that Ariel Sharon has left an indelible mark on the Middle East region in his time in office and his incapacitation leaves regional politics in turmoil. That if anything, for good or for bad, is testament to the legacy he has left behind.
Caleb Liu
Oxford
UK
We want him out
Sir-- Having read Hassan Nafaa's column ('Impeaching Bush' Al-Ahram Weekly 5-11 January) addressing the need to remove George W Bush from office the he has illegitimately held the past five years, I just want to let readers in the Muslim world know that many Americans agree. We believe our democratic system has been hijacked to benefit giant multi- national corporations who are increasingly becoming the "world government". Bush's misadventure in Iraq is murderous and may well prove disastrous for the region as well as the United States. On behalf of Americans who are as appalled by this administration as Prof. Nafaa, let me say we are very sorry.
Gary Minich
Illinois
USA
He wasn't elected
Sir-- I concur whole-heartedly with your assessment of the presidency of George W Bush as the worst disaster the United States and much of the rest of the world has endured in recent history ('Impeaching Bush' Al-Ahram Weekly 5-11 January). I do wish to speak on behalf of the American electorate, however, and assure you and your readers that G W Bush was not elected in 2000, nor was he re-elected in 2004. There is ample evidence of election fraud, perpetrated by the network put in place by the very neocons you refer to in your editorial. This election fraud has left the American citizenry burdened with a president for whom we did not vote, nor do the majority of Americans agree with his policies. We have a façade of democracy veiling the reality of dictatorship in our current administration, and while we eagerly await impeachment proceedings to be initiated by our Congress, Bush and his neocon supporters daily dismantle the very safeguards you lauded in our governmental policies.
Julide Ozan
Florida
USA
Al-Ahram Weekly reserves the right to edit letters submitted to Readers' Corner for brevity and clarity. Readers are advised to limit their letters to a maximum of 300 words.
Recommend
Comment
Printer-friendly
