Egypt's logic
Sir-- In the letter 'Simple logic' by Mohsen Ibrahim (Al-Ahram Weekly, 17-23 July), he claims that bilateral negotiations were introduced by design to negate Egypt from the conflict. What was the alternative, may I ask? Multilateral negotiations between all the Arab countries in one camp versus Israel, or what? Does he know that negotiations held in that manner wouldn't have succeeded and who knows, maybe Egypt would have been negotiating to this day to get back 75 per cent of Sinai.It's common sense that every country has its own political views which serve its needs and differ from those of other countries. Egypt's position during the Camp David talks was far worse than most Arab countries because it had part of its land occupied, so why allow Saudi Arabia or Yemen to interfere when their land was intact and they enjoy a better bargaining position? Surely it is more logical to believe that negotiations would have failed.
Let me add that Egypt's weight hasn't been removed from the conflict. I don't see Egypt with its hands free and not delving into the Palestinian problem whenever a crisis arises -- something it does all the time. One could go on with examples of how Egypt was and still is involved to find a solution to the Palestinian/Israeli stalemate, and to say otherwise is denying all the efforts by the Egyptian government and that is simply unfair.
Divide and conquer is an erroneous judgment because it implies that Arab states were one country which became divided.
Sherif Ahmed
Cairo
Egypt
Losing the law
Sir-- I learned with concern about the decision of the newly formed Belgian government to abolish the Belgian genocide law, which is a grave deterioration in the pursuit of potential foreign war criminals, especially high military and political figures. The freshly abolished law created the opportunity to bring potential war criminals to justice who would escape justice in their own country.Hitherto, the only international judicial possibilities were the so-called international tribunals, but the advantage of the Belgian genocide law was the possibility to pursue individual war criminals without the installation of an international tribunal on behalf of a country/region, which requires a long time of judicial preparations and political negotiations.
Although the ICC is a welcome addition to International Law, its judicial authority is also limited, because crimes committed before 1 July, 2001, are beyond its judicial power and it only applies to crimes committed by subjects of member countries of the ICC, or crimes committed in member ICC countries. As a consequence, this automatically excludes subjects of countries which don't acknowledge the ICC (for example Israel and the USA).
The much touted argument of opponents of this law -- that it can be misused for political reasons -- makes no sense, because in International Law the definition of war crimes is so strictly formulated, that the referred can only be judged according to the rules of International Law. It is a great reason for concern, that by the abolition of the Belgian genocide law a potentially great number of suspected war criminals cannot be tried according to International Law.
Astrid Essed
Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Shared destiny
Sir-- Blair should not help push Arafat off the road and Sharon should share the road to the peace with Arafat; it is God's plan to reconcile them and their peoples. It would be most unwise for Mr Blair to engage in Mr Sharon's efforts to sideline Mr Arafat because he represents a people, an identity and a struggle -- every bit as much as Mr Sharon does.Both men have been destined by God to share the same soil and land as neighbours, and the world expects Mr Sharon to accept and fulfil his neighbourly responsibility.
Doris Cadigan
Massachusetts
USA
Terrorism works
Sir-- Historically, the first known suicide terrorist (hero) was Samson, the Jew who killed many innocent people and himself in the Temple. More recent examples such as in South Africa, where Mandela had to use force to end apartheid, the US invasion of Iraq to remove the tyrant (hopefully not to occupy and exploit). Heroic French resistance fighters (called terrorists by the Nazis) during World War II, Algerian freedom fighters (called terrorists by the French), Israeli terrorism (called heroic by the Israelis) against the British before 1948 (King David Hotel).Finally, the terrible act of violence of 9/11 changed the Bush administration from an aloof dissociated bystander to an active participant and partner in the search for peace in the Middle East. (One week after the tragedy Bush, realising that terrorism was a result of injustice and desperation, declared there should be an independent free Palestinian state, something no other president dared declare for 50 years).
Aziz Rifaat
Cairo
Egypt
Which West Bank?
Sir-- We have North Korea and South Korea. We had East and West Germany. I do not understand why Arabs use the term the West Bank instead of East Palestine.Many individuals in the USA told me they come from the "West Bank", but I wonder why don't they say from Palestine, or from East Palestine. Change the name please, the West Bank is not a way to identify the Palestinian people.
Jose Alfonso
Elpaso
USA
Terminator minds
Sir-- Thanks to Graham Usher in 'Losing in Faluja' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 17-23 July) for showing the rest of the world the failure of the US forces to govern in Faluja.As for the brutality and violence directed at the Iraqi people, one cannot expect much from a group of young men and "women" drunk with power, whose cultural and intellectual knowledge very often does not reach far beyond driving a car, ordering food at a fast food outlet or being brainwashed by films such as Rambo and Terminator.
Keep up the good work.
Moktar El-Ayari
Ontario
Canada
Real history
Sir-- I have read Johan Vekerken's letter 'Rights of Arab Jews' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 17-23 July) and unfortunately what he wrote is incorrect. Arab Jews departed Arab countries by their own accord after the "creation " of their promised state.Of course Mr Vekerken does not agree that Israel now was Palestine and was given to Jews by Lord Balfour on a silver platter after stealing it from the Palestinians.
Mr Vekerken, read real history. That land never belonged to the Israelis.
Samuel Peters
Montreal
Canada
Convenient Arabism
Sir-- After reading 'Torching the right of return' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 10-16 July) I wondered what the US keeps telling us that the Arab people from Syria, Palestine and Egypt living and/or fighting in Iraq are foreigners.At the same time, the US government turns around and tells us that the Palestinians must be settled in Arab states. This is a contradiction never discussed in the Arab media.
Jacoob Munzler
New York, NY
USA
Nobody's friends
Sir-- I believe Professor Nafaa's analysis 'The neo-con triumph' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 17-23 July) is pretty much on the mark with the exception of his suggestion that the neo-con's vision entails Israeli domination of the Arab region.This group has no intention of ceding any kind of power to anyone. They view Israel as a dangerous wild card in their equation. This dilemma was greatly amplified when Sharon treated Bush's demands to pull his army out of occupied territory with utter contempt.
Nothing infuriates this group more than people they support refusing to follow orders. Israel is clearly a major problem in their grand scheme and they don't have a clue on how to resolve this.
Robert Denholm
Idyllwild, CA
USA
Of two minds
Sir-- I have just read Hassan Nafaa's article 'The neo-con triumph' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 17-23 July). For the most part it is well written and argued, at least until the very end. There he writes: "In time, however, Washington will discover that its regional vision is short-sighted, based on mistaken assumptions, and formulated by people who are more faithful to Israeli interests than US ones. The neo- conservative approach is not in America's long- term interest."Suddenly, without warning, Mr Nafaa stops arguing in a rational way, stops marshalling facts and logic, and instead lurches into unsupported assertions, table thumping, and blatant anti-Semitism (by now, most educated people know that many of the leading US neo-cons are Jews). This is a shame. Up to this point, while one could not agree with everything he wrote, one at least had the impression of reading the essay of a professor of political science who was intelligent, rational and well informed.
I get the impression from reading his essay that Mr Nafaa is a conflicted individual. On the one hand, he is striving to be "modern", rational and fair-minded. On the other hand, he suffers from an inability to transcend tribe and to stay modern, rational and fair- minded for more than a few short minutes.
I would urge Mr Nafaa to listen to the good voice in his head and to eschew the hate-filled voice of ignorance and bias. We all have that hateful voice, but some of us at least try to keep it in check. Otherwise, the world will never improve. Particularism will always triumph over universal human rights and values.
Bernard Frischer
Los Angeles, CA
USA
Shifting strategies
Sir-- I think 'The neo-con triumph' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 17-23 July) is unusually perceptive; I take only two exceptions. First, the assumption of a US strategy that is unchanging through time. Clearly, the oil policy has changed; in the 1950s and 1960s, the Republicans tended to favour the large multi- national oil companies and the Democrats, then under the domination of Texans like L B Johnson and Sam Rayburn even favoured tariffs on oil to protect the so-called "small independents" (the concept of energy independence started with these people not with the ecologists). Consequently, the Republicans in those days tended to be pro-Arab, or at least pro- Arab oil. This contributed greatly to Eisenhower's surprising decision to turn on the French and the British during the Suez crisis.This division of opinion changed during the 1970s, which brings me to my second point, namely the expansion of the skillfully-run Zionist project in America, as described for example in Paul Findley's various books. For all practical purposes both parties are competitively Zionist. This is due to their lobby's effective coordination of the Israeli government, supportive American Jews (Jews are by no means unanimous on the Palestinian question), and increasingly large sections of the Christian Evangelical movement.
The neo-conservative movement is almost entirely a subsidiary of American Zionism not as the author thinks, the other way around. This movement thinks that America's and Israel's goals are, and always will be, entirely congruent.
S G Briggs
New Orleans, LA
USA
Passing the buck
Sir-- The way the Bush administration has conducted itself before and after the war is an insult to the practice and ideals of democracy, to say the very least. After manipulating intelligence briefs and then attempting to find WMD evidence later to justify the occupation, we now have an FBI investigation which is attempting to find out if other governments or individuals would have benefited from the war against Iraq.Instead of passing the buck, I believe we already know which countries, or rather government officials, were hoping to make money deals -- the ones who rushed eagerly to the forefront of a preemptive assault. Now, not only is the American public spending billions of dollars a month in Iraq and on anti-terrorism services at home, but even more money will be poured into investigations that might only reveal a few inept fall guys and a slap on the wrist for a president who knowingly deceived the American public.
Since the money is flowing so freely, I say let the coalition of the willing few contribute their own troops and money, and clean up the mess they have made. Countries which voted against sending troops to Iraq unless under a UN-mandated charter are to be commended. After all, what will the US government do if they don't contribute? Drop a (WMD) bomb on them and follow it up with a ballot-box marked 'democracy'?
May Beck
California
USA
In a nutshell
Sir-- I don't get it. In 'Daggers and roses' (Al- Ahram Weekly, 17-23 July), the tribes, in the end, want an Iraqi government authority in Basra. They complain that the British are not setting one up, and the political parties complain the British are just playing tribal politics. Let me know when they figure out that the British are not Iraqis, and the Iraqi government Basra wants will be composed of the Iraqis in Basra who complain they do not have a government.The statement in 'Moment of truth' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 17-23 July) that "The Shi'ites in general must also overcome their internal divisions," is not true. Shi'ites will have their cake even when divided. The only requirement is that the various groups represent their constituents in a fair democratic process.
Matt Young
California
USA
True ailments
Sir-- In his article 'Freeing the past' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 10-16 July), Paul Sullivan introduced himself, not as a member of the influential think tank establishment in the current US administration, but as a zealous advocate for Arab salvation. However, one cannot discard the logic and consistency of the analysis of the ills of the Arab societies, regimes, and most important their current historic impasse.The painful, albeit truthful, condition of the concept of law in the Arab societies as a whole is a prime source of the deep resentment and dissatisfaction for the ordinary Arab citizen, regardless of his or her nationality. Sullivan's ironic reference to nepotism in its colloquial and sarcastic names "kosa" and "wasta", in addition to his comment on the fragility of the legal system, especially in promoting the sense of security for those who need it, are, by all means, serious observations that should not be overlooked or considered as a cultural criticism by a renowned and sympathetic intellectual who stands for the moral aspiration of the Arab people at large.
That article addresses, in a direct and blunt way, the urgency to put an end to "lawlessness" in Arab societies without "leaving it too much to outsiders" which "could cause more problems than cures".
Mostafa Waly
Cairo
Egypt
The Inquisition lives
Sir-- My smile warps into sadness when I work my way through articles such as 'Cosmetics or conviction?' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 2-9 July) by Mr Gareth Jenkins. The subject of Turkey joining the EEC was already a lively one in the early 1970s when one senior West European diplomat said at a dinner party at the time "It won't happen," adding cryptically, ""We haven't forgiven them for Constantinople." The pith of it was the religious issue then and it remains the case today.Although today's rhetoric now reads "poor human rights record", using Christian standards as the baseline which it has re-christened as "universal", Turkish leaders were as aware of the religious obstacle in the 1970s as they are today, leaving them with little sincere incentive to enact EU-compatible laws. There are very influential people in Europe who are fundament(alistic)ally opposed to admitting any Muslim country into the EU. It began with the Inquisition, reincarnated into 1930s Germany and somewhat more diffusely, in the wars of Bosnia and Kosovo. I dare speculate that this may be the true reason the Turkish general staff allowed two governments not to join the US invasion of Iraq, despite the opportunity it might have offered them to get a handle on the Iraqi Kurds and PKK.
Despite the reasonably prompt release of 11 Turkish special forces by the US, the fact that the assault and capture happened at all (and wasn't even hushed up) underscores to Ankara that the Inquisition mindset is still at the helm, alive and thriving. Why should Turkey move any faster towards Western standards than it is already doing, Mr Jenkins?
Arthur Borges
Xiangtan
China
Spinning death
Sir-- Mr Galal Amin's article 'First-class manipulation' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 17-23 July) is the truth personified. My feelings exactly. Now their spin-doctoring has cost the life of a very genuine man. I thought I was passed being shocked at our so-called Democratic governments, but the lies that were told before the war and now after the war have shocked me to the core.What I can't understand is why so many leaders in the Middle East pander to Mr Bush and Co. We went out and demonstrated against the war in Iraq, the response from your side was very weak. I watched with great anticipation when the Arab nations had that conference, but what came out of it? That you were as divided as the West.
I feel very deeply for the ordinary people in your country. I am very friendly with a lot of refugees from Iraq, Iran and Somalia, and my heart bleeds for them. Man's inhumanity to man knows no bounds.
Johanna Moren
Sunnemo
Sweden
NIAC rebuttal
Sir-- 'Protests without borders' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 26 June - 2 July) completely misrepresents the Washington DC-based National Iranian American Council.NIAC does not make any recommendations about foreign policy towards Iran. It is an education and advocacy group which provides tools for Iranian- Americans to take their own stances and convey them to US decision-makers. The author of this article simply pulled a snippet off the Web site, which was one of multiple options that Web site viewers had in expressing their views to US lawmakers.
If anyone spends more than 60 seconds reading the site, he/she will see that NIAC is specifically a non-political and non-partisan organisation which would never make such a recommendation. Please print a correction immediately.
Lily Sarafan
Washington, DC
USA
Unbiased opinion
Sir-- I would like to take a minute just to tell you that I enjoy reading your newspaper.There is no way in North America for many people to get an unbiased opinion of what is going on in the Middle East or Arab world. Thank you.
Luciano Marcelli
Nova Scotia
Canada
Expert eye
Sir-- I am an ex-Airborne Maintenance Technician from the 1960s and 1970s, and would like to point out that the picture shown in 'Koreans close in on Cobra Ball' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 6-12 March) is a Rivet Joint, not a Combat Sent or Cobra Ball.There are three varieties of the RC-135 at this time: Rivet Joint, Combat Sent and Cobra Ball.
Bill Boltinghouse
Council Bluffs, Iowa
USA
Same stature
Sir-- In my letter 'Lost credit' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 10- 16 July) I did not mean to imply that Dr Joann Fletcher, the woman who has been acclaimed by some to be the first to come up with the theory that the "Younger Lady" (from KV35) can be Queen Nefertiti, has no expertise when it comes to Egyptian mummies.What I meant to say is that her expertise is not, going by evidence of her publications, so vastly superior to my own, as I have been researching the subject for years, paying particular attention to the royal mummies. So we can both be considered mummy experts.
Marianne Luban
California
USA
FAQs on Islam
Sir-- No one can deny your newspaper's effect and its policy of publishing different opinions, which encourages readers to express their opinion freely and accept others'.I would like to suggest the creation of a section in your newspaper which talks about Islam, clarify its tenets and convey its true teachings for those who know nothing about it. There can be a section for questions and answers for those who have any queries, for those who want to know more, but don't know where to look. We need to help them out.
Dalia Yacout
Alexandria
Egypt
More Muslim world
Sir-- I am an Indian national and a regular reader of your newspaper. I am very proud to know that we Muslims have such a quality newspaper that competes with the Western media.I would like to suggest that you newspaper include more articles on Islam, discuss the issues of the Muslim world and not only the Middle East, work on refuting accusations against Islam and Muslims and profile leading Muslim personalities.
As a leading Muslim country in the Middle East, Egypt can do everything.
Abdul Shaheed Balloor
Kasaragod
IndiaAl-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.
Al-Ahram Weekly Online : 24 - 30 July 2003 (Issue No. 648)
Located at: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2003/648/letters.htm