Tear down the wall
Sir-- The Berlin Wall was a symbol of the Cold War and of oppression. Now that Israel is building a new Berlin wall in the Holy Land allows the whole world to see that the Israeli government is led by people who don't have much more respect for human rights and human dignity than the totalitarian leaders of the GDR.But there is one difference; the army of the GDR built the wall completely on their own territory and did not have the arrogance to annex the land of their neighbours, as is the case in Israel. The "Ghettoisation" of Palestine will be one of the greatest crimes of our time, and will put an end to any hope for peace in the Middle East.
The world must stand together to prevent this wall.
Stefan Csordas
Vienna
Austria
End occupation
Sir-- I would like to make a proposal for settling the Middle East conflict. As a point of departure I denounce occupation as the highest form of terrorism, because it is organised and managed by the state apparatus of the occupation forces.I condemn all attacks against all civilians carried out by both individuals and organisations; no measure of despair can justify the killing of civilians. I condemn terrorism and the killing of innocent civilians, regardless of their nationality. However, I am aware that all these acts are the consequence of continued Israeli occupation. To tolerate the existence of Israeli occupation means to tolerate its consequences -- terrorism being one of them. That is why the world cannot and should not tolerate this occupation any more and must do everything to end it.
Suhail Abu Nofal
Prague
The Czech Republic
How to win
Sir-- Your editorial 'Turmoil lies ahead' (Al- Ahram Weekly, 16-22 October) -- and reproduced in the New York Times -- urges the US to be a less biased player in the Middle East is correct. However, the problem is not and by and large has not been, a problem of the US executive (presidential) branch of government, but rather with its legislative arm which is much more susceptible to the monetary blandishments (legalised tips) of minority special interests. The only way to beat this is to communicate and convince the thought-leaders of the (generally apathetic) American public.The fact that the New York Times featured your editorial at all is a sign of progress. Our policies vis-à-vis Israel are clearly not in the best interests of 99 per cent of Americans. Any way that you can help them understand that with logic, facts and figures will be helpful. For example, over the past 10 years, how many children under 15 were killed by: Palestinians? Israelis? Who buys the bullets and planes for the Israelis? Do Americans want this blood on their hands?
The wild-eyed Muslim zealots and their cynical paymasters are Israel's best allies in the struggle for the hearts and minds of the American public.
F S Johns
Texas
USA
House of glass
Sir-- In your editorial 'Turmoil lies ahead' (Al- Ahram Weekly, 16-22 October) you state the following: "The US must seriously re-examine its policy towards the Arab and Islamic worlds. Washington cannot continue to be seen as blindly and unequivocally supportive of Israel. Israel cannot be protected at all costs even when it deliberately derails the peace process." I believe the US is the sole country that is objective in the search for peace in the Middle East; do you not find fault that every other nation in the world blindly and unequivocally support the Arab cause against Israel.Palestinian refugees are mistreated and abused in all the Arab countries. They are denied work visas in many cases, forced to live in camps and unhealthy conditions, manipulated by corrupt clergy into becoming suicide bombers, are used as pawns by the war lords of corrupt Arab countries.
How much money does Arafat have hidden in Europe while his wife and child live in a mansion in France? I see a world of Muslim against Muslim, so clean up your own act before you tell the United States how to act.
What is Egypt doing to hamper the shipment of arms through underground tunnels into Gaza -- the arms that help perpetuate violence?
David Matola
Fort Lauderdale, FL
USA
Twenty questions
Sir-- In order to try to understand the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians better, I have become a regular reader of your newspaper. It offers a point of view that is different from North American papers and I appreciate that. It does so without shrill rhetoric or sloganeering which is also to your credit. But to this North American, and I suspect to most of us, it does not seem to answer the questions we ask ourselves, especially when we try to imagine ourselves as either an Israeli or a Palestinian.In the case of the article on Gaza 'Carnage in Gaza' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 23-29 October), you suggest that the Israelis perpetrated "carnage" and that their actions mirror the Nazis. It is only in the last paragraph that you suggest that there was any reason for this at all other than a bloodthirsty need to murder innocent Palestinians.
The article states: "Israel sought to justify the rampage in Rafah, stating the need to uncover and destroy tunnels used by suspected Palestinian militants to smuggle weapons from Egypt." The impression I have from reading about Rafah over the past few years is that it is a community that straddles the Egyptian border, where Palestinian fighters use private homes to access tunnels into Egypt. These tunnels are used to smuggle weapons and explosives from Egypt to armed organisations that are committed to the destruction of Israel. The impression that I have of the events of this particular week is that the Israelis have cleared a swath of homes from the border area in order to eliminate the use of the tunnels, and they targeted two automobiles with Palestinian fighters. We are told that the idea that bystanders were also killed has proven to be baseless.
Some of the questions in my mind, and I suspect in the minds of many others who try to understand by putting ourselves in the position of all parties, are several. First, why is Egypt allowing tunnels that are used to smuggle guns and explosives to remain open? How would Egypt or for that matter Canada or the United States deal with a similar situation? Does it serve the purpose of peace to eulogise people who "resist" by targeting civilians? Does it serve the purpose of peace to demonise a military that appears to act with restraint in very difficult circumstances? How are the Palestinian people better off by believing and being encouraged to think that they can destroy Israel? Who benefits from this situation?
Henry Saltiel
Vancouver
Canada
Embracing all victims
Sir-- In the article 'Re-defining collateral damage' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 23-29 October), the writer Hala Sakr manages to lament the effect of Middle East violence on every single affected group of children except one -- Israeli children. While it may be understandable this reflects the psychology of war, in war one question is supreme: are you winning? If not, maybe a change of mind is in order.I also read with interest the article 'Carnage in Gaza' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 23-29 October) by Khaled Amayreh, and I agree the loss of innocent Palestinian lives is appalling. I have one question: do you think most Palestinians believe that Israeli civilian victims are similarly innocent ? If so, then I believe a way to peace could be found, even if incredibly difficult. If not, then the killing must relentlessly continue on both sides.
Steve Foote
Arlington, TN
USA
What Sharon wants
Sir-- I want to know, what does Sharon want? It's obvious he doesn't want peace and only wants to kill and destroy. Every day, we watch in disbelief as war crimes are committed against Palestinians, the most recent of which was in Rafah where more than 15 people were killed and their homes destroyed. Sharon's crimes are not only against Palestinians but also against the Arabs, the civilised world and human rights.Every day Palestinians pay the tax for Sharon's policy in blood, and the world looks on. Not only does the United States join the spectators, but also gives Israel the green light to commit more crimes -- the most recent of which was against Syria on 5 October.
While Sharon promised his people to bring peace in three weeks, two years have passed and no peace has been achieved. He wants everything but gives nothing. With this war, he will give his people nothing but fear, deadly fear.
Abdallah Elshewy
Gharbiya
Egypt
Reasonable argument
Sir-- While I wish to commend the UN for its vote not to support or indeed not to legitimise Israel's cruel decision to "remove" Chairman Arafat, I wish to praise another Israeli who aired a voice of reason during this madness. Her name is Dr Naomi Chazan, a professor of political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Writing in The Jerusalem Post on 12 September 'Don't Touch Yassar Arafat', Dr Chazan cautioned that the removal of Chairman Arafat would be "a colossal mistake". She is indeed right -- Sharon's arch enemy has become the most popular man on the planet.Dr Chazan also noted how the Sharon government continuously dangles Chairman Arafat as the root cause of all its problems, but nothing could be further from the truth. She suggests that dealing with Arafat may yet facilitate an end to such troubling situations. How right she may be again.
Doris Cadigan
Massachusetts
USA
Dim hope
Sir-- This is the first time that I hear about or read your newspaper, and I would like to let you know that I'm glad someone is finally openly criticising the Bush administration. I believe Americans are legal thieves, invading countries, installing dictatorships, stealing their oil, etc.Why should the assassin Sharon decide Arafat should be made destitute? Arafat is the chosen Palestinian leader, and the Israelis and George Bush have no right to decide otherwise. Why does Bush give Sharon an open mandate to kill Palestinians? The poor Palestinians have only their lives to fight against missiles, and who is the stupid world blaming? The Palestinians.
I am ashamed of being part of this sick world. I think the mistake of terrorists is killing innocent civilians; they should go directly to the decision-makers of the world, because their people don't care if innocent civilians are killed. In fact, they use it as more propaganda. But harm them directly and they'll have to start thinking.
I hate the Americans since Clinton left. We now have hard-core right-wing extremist Republicans, as well as killers and dictators throughout the world. And how can the UN accept Putin, an assassin and the ex-leader of the KGB; China, which killed its own kin in Tiannanmen; and the Austrian president who is an ex-Nazi? The UN is dominated by the US, but when will the world really have justice and freedom? Perhaps never; this is very sad.
Claudine Pioger
Quebec
Canada
Geneva dud
Sir-- The main articles of the Geneva Accord [between Israeli leftists and Palestinians] are a grave violation of International Law with regards the elementary human rights of the Palestinian people. They include the abandonment of the right of return for Palestinian refugees, the demilitarisation of a future Palestinian state and the maintenance of a number of settlements in a new Palestinian state.During the so-called Independence War in 1948 between Israel and a number of Arab countries, more than 750,000 Palestinian civilians were driven out of their homes and land by Zionist militias. This is a war crime according to international law (4th Geneva Convention) and despite UN Resolution 194 which demanded their immediate return, Israel always refused to do that.
Abandoning this right is not only a token of great injustice, but also a flagrant violation of International law.
Another point is the demilitarisation of a future Palestinian state, which would be controlled by an international military force. Apart from the fact that the Israeli army thus can threaten the existence of the Palestinian state, it is a serious violation of the principle of self- determination, which states that each nation has the liberty to choose their state institutions -- which of course includes the right to an army.
Moreover, control by an international force implies a foreign occupation, which is a violation of international law.
The maintenance of a number of settlements in a new Palestinian state is unacceptable, because international law forbids the expropriation of land of people under occupation. And hence, all settlements in occupied Palestinian areas are illegal and should be dismantled.
The Geneva Accord peace proposal does not respect the rights of the Palestinian people, and therefore is not a serious contribution to peace in the Middle East.
Astrid Essed
Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Paper quality
Sir-- I am writing to comment on something I believe has drawn the attention of many like myself. It is concerning the quality of the printed edition of your newspaper, and I, of course, mean the paper and the ink.I believe you are presenting us with a remarkable collection of written and photographed materials, but the quality of paper and ink do not match the quality of the content. What makes it worse, is that if someone, myself included, likes to keep track of your publication, they have to deal with a low-quality paper which decays after a short time.
I call on those who are responsible for printing of Al-Ahram Weekly to do this publication some justice, especially that the French paper Al-Ahram Hebdo is printed on good quality paper, is in colour and at the same price.
Mahmoud Nabil
Alexandria
Egypt
New beginnings
Sir-- This is an [abridged] open letter to President George Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair:I avail this opportunity to present my compliments and wish to bring the following for your kind consideration. Your invasion of Iraq with your allies on a fictitious report, has had a negative impact on your administration and the administration of your allies who jumped on your bandwagon. There have been numerous protests and condemnations, nonetheless you persist to stay on in a sovereign country, with the pretext of helping re-build Iraq. In fact you are interfering in the lives of Iraqi people.
Iraqi people are capable of determining self- rule, and the United Nations and other Nations United are willing to help Iraq rebuild, without your direct presence. Today we are living in the most advanced period of human history, so invading a sovereign state and disrupting the lives of its citizens is a violation of human rights, as well as all the norms and principles of a civilised world. You and your allies have ignored the world body -- the United Nations -- betrayed the expectations of your people, your country and those who stand for freedom, justice and honour. Since you violated these principles, your days are numbered in the White House and at 10 Downing Street.
Your greed for Iraqi oil must be stopped now, or else your next stop will be Iran, then Libya and other African oil producing countries. Your adventure in Afghanistan encouraged you to walk into Iraq; your manhunt for Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein is futile and weak because you have no solid evidence of their involvement in the 11 September attacks. Your theory is as baseless as the presence of WMDs in Iraq. Both these fugitives served your whims and fancies, but now it seems they have served their purpose, or know too much, so you have decided to hunt them down. In the process, you have disrupted the lives of innocent and independent people, all in the name of false terrorism and WMDs.
I have visited Iraq, and the Iraqis are noble people, hospitable, kind, considerate and hardworking. Let them sort out their internal differences, they have lived with these differences for years. What are you still doing in Iraq? Your soldiers are regulating traffic, and now you are asking contingents from other countries to be deployed. This shows that you are desperately trying to justify to yourselves and the world your presence in Iraq. The Iraqis can take care of their own traffic, so call your boys home. Let them spend Thanksgiving with their loved ones.
You and your allies should pay reparations to Iraq just as Iraq was made to pay for damages in Kuwait; the same resolutions should be applicable to you and your allies. Perhaps this will prevent you and your buddies from going on another rampage away from home.
I leave it to the better judgment of your respective governments and people -- whom you misinformed -- to decide your fate.
As for the UN, its role needs to be redefined, its charter rewritten and its objectives clearly spelled out so that UN policies are strong and effective.
I call on the Iraqi people to give you gentlemen a fortnight to pack up, lock, stock, and smoking gun barrels, about turn, and quick march out of Baghdad. At the same time, Iraq should roll out the red carpet and welcome with open arms -- and traditional hospitality -- the international diplomatic, business and professional communities to help rebuild Iraq. All the Iraqis abroad should be asked to return and help rebuild their country.
People of Iraq, I salute you; let not your enemy divide your culture and families. Demonstrate to the world that a new way of life is beginning in Iraq, forget all differences and live in harmony and peace.
Abdul-Gani Ayoob
Madurai
India
Suds away!
Sir-- As someone who spent his entire life in the cleaning industry managing people that do nothing but clean horizontal, vertical and diagonal surfaces day in and day out seven days a week, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, I found professor Yunan Labib's article 'Clean living' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 16-22 October) very fascinating. While it remains factual even in our present day that the basic tenets of cleanliness continue to hinge on soap and water, the cleaning industry over the last half a century has evolved beyond anything that Mr Dagher could have imagined.Nowadays, the cleaning industry boasts about the introduction of the high speed floor machine which is capable of cleaning 10,000- 15,000 square metres an hour -- a far cry from the mop and bucket that didn't accomplish one 10th of that in manual labour. In addition, the highly touted new smart vacuum machines equipped with numerous attachment tools are capable of performing a multitude of jobs simultaneously, simply by utilising the attachment tools that come with each individual unit.
Dust, debris, pollen and all other foreign substances adhering to household furniture can be easily removed with a single stroke. Let me dare to say that they are a thing of the past. Heck, there are robots out there cleaning huge warehouses, airports and convention halls. The robots are controlled by a remote and have sensors, bills and whistles capable of detecting and avoiding any obstruction that happen to come in their way.
Then there is list of the self-cleaning household appliances. We now have the self- cleaning oven, the self-cleaning refrigerator and microwave. Doctors may no longer be required to admonish their patients to be extra vigilant with their personal hygiene, they can simply give them a damp wiping cloth that is medically saturated with all the necessary ingredients to keep the body pores fully open. Clergymen may continue to exhort their congregations to wash up, but they now can offer warm water as an incentive especially on cold days, liquid soap instead of bar soap, even waterless cleaners and disinfectants for those allergic to plain water.
We did come along way from the days of using highly toxic, stinky cleaning product. The market is now full of user-friendly cleaning product, and yes it is still at paltry prices. There should be no excuse left for anyone to pursue an unhealthy, unhygienic lifestyle at home or abroad.
Hatem Abunimeh
Chicago, IL
USA
Al-Ahram Weekly Online : 30 October - 5 November 2003 (Issue No. 662)
Located at: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2003/662/letters.htm