Openness first Normalization last

Linda Menhuin sent us this. The title is her own: Openness first Normalization last

Two months ago I and my sister were delighted to receive a wedding invitation from an Iraqi family living in Amman, Jordan. We were privileged to have known the groom’s grandfather, who spent his law internship with my father, back in the Forties in Baghdad. Eventually he earned fame as an audacious lawyer in Iraq and abroad. Once, bumping into him in London a couple of years ago, I had approached him to seek help unearthing any clues about my missing father - kidnapped during Ahmed Hassan Al Baker’s time, and of whom we have heard nothing since.
Both of us have now become refugees, dispossessed from the country we once called home…but like the Arab poet Imru’e Alqais said, “Alas neighbor, we are both strangers here yet we are as kith and kin."
My younger sister and I embraced the invitation wholeheartedly. The visit to Amman lasted for two days only, yet for me it was the journey of my life. This rare opportunity enabled us to re- connect with our fellow countrymen, something which had proved to be out-of-bounds for almost forty years. They too have had to flee from the persecutions, the wars and the troubled situation in Iraq to embark on a better future. The openness with which they treated us looked so natural. We understood each other as only refugees can, and the frank discussions and the wide-ranging debate even reached out to include the Iraqi Jewish community’s numerous contributions to modern Iraq. In no time we joined the joyful crowd in Arabic popular dance. We could not take our eyes off the columns of men dancing to the Kurdish tunes of the Choppi, the national Kurdish dance. We could not help but let out intermittent sighs for what used to be part of our heritage.

The next day we were taken to Amman’s modern shopping centre. We stood mesmerized in front of the Iraqi goldsmith’s window, admiring the far-fetched enamel designs. We immediately engaged in a lively conversation, sharing with him happy memories of the country, while contrasting it with the present situation; we found ourselves shedding tears over the tragedy of it all. Then we discussed together some of the opportunities for economic cooperation that could be developed between the countries of the region; a better income, long-term prosperity, both so very vital to the livelihoods of our friends and relatives from both camps. How can this encounter be framed? In terms of normalization, openness or re-connecting, while bearing in mind that our interlocutors were well aware of our Iraqi origin and Israeli nationality.

Normalization, according to strong voices in the Arab world, is a prize that Israel is not entitled to: its “bad behavior” towards the Palestinians requires boycotting. Yet this approach has not yielded any positive outcome for Arab interests.

Israel has forged ahead in all directions to establish its presence as a leader in technology internationally, in spite of the Arab boycott. In the eyes of the majority in Israel, normalization with the Arab world is worthy compensation for the suffering from enmity we endured in the last 50 years. Most notably we, Jews from Arab countries, have paid a high price not many are aware of, because of the social and cultural deprivations we have had to endure. Indeed even now there are communities of Jewish refugees who fled in the late Forties and early Fifties from Arab countries, still living in the far-flung development towns, suffering from lack of access to Israel’s economical, cultural and political hub.
The real meaning of normalization: the abundant published material in Hebrew and Arabic reveals an enormous gap between how each party conceives normalization. From the Arab point of view, normalization will engender Israeli total dominance over the region’s culture and economy, thus threatening Arabic stability and continuity. In addition, the concept of normalization as a whole arouses concern and fear, partly from the loss of the common enemy, Israel - substantial glue behind Arab solidarity. Normalization was always conditional on time and circumstances. At one time Israel is required first to withdraw from Lebanon ….at others, it must evacuate all the territories it has annexed, and so on.
On the Israeli side, normalization is the logical step to follow recognition by the Arabs, entailing an exchange of visits as well as dismantling any trade obstacles in the face of economic cooperation. In practice, Arab countries are expected not to add to obstacles aiming to derail opportunities of cooperation with Israel in order to boost the Arabic economy, thus leaving economic initiatives to the private sector that will engender higher employment and eventually improve the standard of living. This approach will bring about tangible results on the ground. Accordingly, it is better to focus on openness rather normalization as a whole, which seems frightening from the Arab perspective.
Global economic openness: Glasnost in the former Soviet Union in 1989 was applied before any process of political reconciliation was put in motion. The reason was a drastic need to shore up the collapsing Soviet economy at the time. In contrast, political openness is more complicated and requires more time, tolerance and a forgiving mindset. Even China underwent major pain to give birth to economic openness while trying to ignore the need to introduce democracy and political openness. Since then, though, she has taken vital steps that define her as an economic giant in the global arena.
The rules of the economic game have changed during the last two decades: America has ceded its leading economic place to growing nations like India and Indonesia. To maintain effective cost margins, big organizations are willing to travel long distances in search of cheaper labor. The distance between Israel and the countries in the region is indeed an asset because it is minimal. Israel possesses ample trading and marketing savvy in a variety of fields. When combined with development of Arabic labor and skills, these can form an unbeatable package capable of winning entirely new markets never before contemplated. It is a fallacy that Israel will inundate the Arabic markets: its produce is far too expensive to sell in the region. Therefore the international markets are the only outlets.
There is no reason to roam uselessly in the labyrinth of what is called Israel’s economic dominance. Just like other growing nations, the Arabs stand to gain from the far-reaching changes which have swept across the world’s economic focus and which are set to open new horizons for all –as explained by Farid Zakaria, author of bestseller The Post-American World.
Openness before normalization: Economic peace will allow the Israeli man in the street to be introduced to indigenous Arabic language and culture. Physical encounters between Arabs and Israelis will emerge, rather than meeting virtually via media such as the Internet, if they do at all. Direct conversations, hearing the truth on each side, will open up new vistas for both sides, influencing each other’s opinions.
A “people to people” roadmap will entail positive and frank discussions based on goodwill. Cordial relations will make inroads from a more established Arabic civilization into a still nascent Israeli society open to different foreign cultures. Since reconciliation is based on truth, it is also very important for the Arabs to realize that Jews from Arab countries - in parallel with the Palestinians - have left behind vast amounts of property (estimated to be equivalent to four times the area of Israel). This is according to a survey made by Maurice Romano - as well as frozen portable and non portable assets estimated at $80 billion, losses that constitute far more than the amount left by the Palestinians. The price that Jewish refugees from Arab countries have paid has been cut off from the narrative of Arab-Israeli conflict.
To conclude: There is no doubt that we need to generate an atmosphere of goodwill to clear the air and encourage people to start talking! And even though an agenda for political recognition cannot be on the cards yet, we don’t need to aim so high: willingness to open up, awareness of each other’s needs - these should be enough initially to promote the process of opening up. It creates greater optimism on the horizon. It also gives us, the people in this region, a far better future to look forward to.

This article by Linda Menuhin (nee Abdel Aziz) first appeared in Elaph in Arabic on 26 October 2009. Linda is an active member of Israel civil society, a member of the board http://www.forum-smart-middle-east.org.il/ and a founding member of Israel-Syria peace society.

Contemporary Arab-Muslim antisemitism

Felix writes: "Here is a new brilliant study. Rather long but the state of the art."

The study examines contemporary anti-Semitism in the Arab-Muslim world, its roots, its characteristics and the strategic dangers inherent in it for the Jewish people in general and the State of Israel in particular.

TO VIEW TEXT CLICK HERE

'Tis the Season to Bash Al-Hurra

Farid of RPS writes: al-Hurra, under the leadership of Mouafac Harb and now Daniel Nassif, has promoted balanced programming that included many appearances by human rights activists and moderate Muslims; furthermore, and most importantly, it has promoted an agenda of tolerance and fairness. No other station beaming into the Middle East has been as effective in striking fear into the hearts of dictators as al-Hurra has been and remains to be. During Larry Register's short-lived era of controversy (He had a picture in his office shaking the hands of Baschar al-Assad and this explains Register's promoting Hezbollah), al-Hurra was an "Occupied Territory" by Arab dictators with the support of their paid consultants and friends in Washington and now that they have no control over it, everyone is conspiring simultaneously (The Washington Post and 60 Minutes) to kill it.

TO VIEW FULL ITEM CLICK HERE

Pessimistic on Reform

This comes in from Felix. It's an interesting item in which Saudi author Turki Al Hamed talks about Arab Society to Al Arabia Satellite TV:

Turki Al-Hamad: "The taboos in Saudi Arabia are different from the taboos in Lebanon, and from the taboos in Egypt, and so on, even though I believe that in all these countries, they tend to view the taboo itself as fundamental. This was not the case in the past. I believe that we've reached the point where everything is ruled by prohibitions. Everything is prohibited unless it is proven to be permitted. This is the problem of Arab society and culture. Instead of making progress, we are regressing – and if only we were regressing in a reasonable manner. Unfortunately, we are regressing in a superstitious and unreasonable manner."

TO VIEW THE AL ARABIA ITEM CLICK HERE

Teenage rape victim

Go to the press and make matters worse - or that seems to be the effect in this harrowing case highlighted by David Sasson:

TO VIEW FULL STORY CLICK HERE

Huntingdon: Racist or Rational?

Is the Huntingdon doctrine thinly veiled racism or rational thinking? You decide. This from Rafi Dajani of ATFP who sends us a particularly interesting alternative view from Avraham Burg:

In Haaretz former Israeli Knesset speaker Avraham Burg uses the example of Israel to reject the Huntington 'clash of civilizations' theory, instead finding the clash as one between 'democratic' and 'theocratic' civilizations, with Muslims, Christians and Jews on both sides of the divide

TIME TO ATTACK By Avraham Burg Haaretz, Opinion (Israel) August 15, 2007
The system of "sacred balance" is Israel's way of surviving and feeling normal. If something happens on the left, it immediately must be canceled out by an event on the right - and then everyone can relax. These equations create the illusion of sanity and save the sticky majority, which is searching for the warm and opinionless center, from having to relate to matters in a matter-of-fact way. It is from there, from the wide open spaces of a valueless and content-free consensus, that Israel's ruin will come - because if everything is balanced and canceled out, there is no need to take a position, or to do anything. It is therefore not surprising that Israel, with all its equations, cannot make decisions on matters of morality and state. The latest equation bridges between draft-dodgers and the soldiers who refuse to evacuate homes in Hebron. On the face of it, we have draft-dodgers - the left-wing bleeding hearts from greater Tel Aviv - and evacuation refuseniks - nationalistic and idealistic, but "a little" too extreme, too patriotic and too religious. And we are in the middle: We live outside Tel Aviv, but not in Hebron; we want peace but are not prepared to pay the Arabs the price. Instead of being flooded with concern over the fanatics and rabbis who have penetrated the fabric of Israeli statehood like cancerous cells, we have created an equation. We were furious for two days, we condemned them - and we went on our merry way. Everything is balanced, thank God.

TO VIEW FULL ITEM CLICK HERE

The Ballot Box alone does not Constitute Democracy

From Memri (with thanks to Felix) and well worth reading in full:

Egyptian Liberal Sayid Al-Qimni, London Islamist Hani Al-Sibai Debate Secularism, Fundamentalism in Arab World

The following are excerpts from a debate between Egyptian liberal Sayid Al-Qimni and London Islamist Hani Al-Sibai, which aired on Al-Jazeera TV on July 10, 2007.

Sayid Al-Qimni: "The ballot box alone does not constitute democracy. The ballot box is just a box made of glass, and nobody knows what goes on inside. People put a piece of paper in it. By no means does the ballot box constitute democracy. We are the prey over which two types of [predators] compete: ruling families and military governments on the one hand, and Islamic dictatorships on the other hand. These two types of dictatorships compete over us, the prey.

"When the mufti of the government bans a certain book, the mufti of the [Islamist] groups bans a movie. The former places a ban on words, and the latter places a 'ban' on an entire person, by killing him. The women wear a uniform like soldiers. You see them in the street, and they all look like soldiers. The government flogs anyone who goes to the police station to file a complaint. The Islamists legitimize flogging. If you legitimize flogging, why are you angry when the government does it? How can you be angry at the government for flogging you, when you are the ones legitimizing the flogging? Flogging is part of Islamic law.

"When you go to the mosque they humiliate you, saying: 'You are responsible for what happened to the nation.' This poor man merely came to fulfill his religious duties, and they pile this dirt on him in the mosque. They humiliate him and attribute all the sins of this nation to him. All the nation's defeats are due to this wretched man's defiance of God. They are constantly setting new red lines. Is there such a thing as red lines in democracy? The government has its own red lines, the ruling families have their own red lines, and so do the military and the Islamists. I also have red lines, but it's useless.

"As you've said, these people issue fatwas about saliva, about the urine of camels, about the urine of the Prophet, and so on... Look, all these people, this entire process, all the candidates, the people who won the elections, the people who helped them succeed - they all belong in the madhouse."

View the piece

Press Freedom

Felix sent us this cartoon, which is one of a number relating to the arrest and detaention of journalists published in the Arab World for World Press Freedom Day. The above cartoon was published in Syria.

TO VIEW OTHERS CLICK HERE

New Mauritanian Democracy Inspires Arab Liberals

Felix sends this item which suggests Arab governments ignore Mauritania because they're frightened of Mauritania's democracy - though it may in reality be that they ignore Mauritania because they are not interested in black Africa (few Arabs think of Mauritania as Arab even though it is technically an Arab League member state and a proportion of the population does speak Arabic):

On April 19, 2007, Sidi Ould Sheikh 'Abdallahi was sworn in as Mauritania'sfirst president to be elected in free and fair democratic elections. Whilethe ceremony was attended by many heads of state from sub-Saharan Africancountries, no Arab head of state was in attendance (the Arab League countrywith the most senior representation at the ceremony was Morocco, which sentits prime minister). This fact was noted in the Mauritanian press and byArab liberals in the Middle East, who interpreted it as a sign of theautocratic leaders' fear of democracy. In contrast, Arab democrats praisedthe Mauritanian model, saying that it was the first time that an Arabcountry had, entirely of its own will, deposed a dictator and installed atrue democracy.

TO VIEW FULL ARTICLE CLICK HERE

Qatar TV losing its relevance, say critics

You'd think a media savvy country like Qatar could do better:

The Peninsula - 14 April, 2007
Media Critics and the native intelligentsia are worried over the fast losing relevance of Qatar Television, in the country's contemporary socio-cultural landscape. They believe that the television channel has failed to live up to the expectation of an average Qatari, reports Al Sharq. "At a time when the world of visual media is witnessing a revolution, the state-owned television channel is no where in the race. For want of good programmes, there is a steep fall in their viewership rate of the channel", said the country's leading socio-cultural figures.

TO VIEW FULL ITEM CLICK HERE

Israeli spokesman Regev on 18 Doughty Street TV

HERE

Believing Everything They Read

(This is a post from Joshua Muravchik, originally on the Commentary Blog)

One of the discouraging things about the Arab world is the epistemological deficit.

I am visiting Saudi Arabia now, on a State Department speaker’s program, giving talks and interviews trying to explain neoconservatism and to demystify U.S. policy toward the Middle East, as well as interviewing Saudis and learning about their country.

Many of the Saudis whom I am meeting are sophisticated and friendly to America, albeit critical of current policies. But here, as elsewhere in the region, even smart people are capable of believing far-fetched things and often seem deficient in the skills of reality-testing.

On my first day, an accomplished editor, publisher, and newspaper columnist complained to me that the United States had just doubled aid to Israel. I had been without news sources for a couple of days in travel, but this seemed unlikely to me, as I tried to explain. My interlocutor insisted: he had followed the reports carefully. When I got access to the Internet, I found the story. The State Department had begun formal conversations with Israel about Israel’s request for an increase in military aid of 2 to 2.5 percent.

Next, I lunched with a warm, gracious graduate of UCLA, a highly successful businessman. When the subject of terrorism came up, he asked me about the Mossad plot to blow up the Mexican congress. I asked where he had heard of such a thing. He replied that it was all over the world press. Not the American press, I retorted. Exactly, he explained, the U.S. had suppressed the story, but everyone else in the world knew about it.

Once again I scurried to the Internet. And I found it. According to a story that ran in October 2001 in something called La Voz de Aztlan, two Israelis, presumed to be agents, snuck into the Mexican congress carrying “nine hand grenades, sticks of dynamite, detonators, wiring, and two 9mm ‘Glock’ automatics.” Although security was tight, the two managed to insinuate themselves into a delegation of sugar workers who had come to lobby. But the alert workers noticed something suspicious about the duo, namely “that they were carrying guns and what looked to them to be explosives.” So they grabbed them and turned them over to the police. To no avail: “the Israeli Embassy used heavy-handed measures to have the two Israelis released.”

And what was the purpose of the escapade? La Voz de Aztlan explained: “President Bush and the U.S. Zionists want Mexico fully involved in the [Afghan] war principally because if things get tough in the Middle East and the oil rich Arabs leave the coalition, the U.S. military machine is going to need alternative sources of oil, and PEMEX is just across the border. We believe that the two Zionists terrorist were going to blow up the Mexican congress. The second phase was to mobilize both the Mexican and U.S. press to blame Osama bin Laden. Most likely then Mexico would declare war on Afghanistan as well, commit troops and all the oil it could spare to combat Islamic terrorism.”

Why do so many people in the Arab world swallow such stuff?