The Ultimate Divide

And the Illusion of Armageddon

The recent events in Iran, Pakistan, Lebanon and even inside the United States, show that we are experiencing a deep divide in our world. You can see it and you can touch it. It affects elections like the ones we have recently seen in the U.S., Iran and Lebanon. It crosses boundaries of geography, ethnicity, religion or cultures. The new divide is not sectarian. We have seen in Lebanon that both the Hezbollah-led alliance and March 14 coalition both had Muslim and Christian factions as a part of each. This divide is not nationalistic. We have seen some right-wing American Neoconservatives publicly or secretly wishing that Ahmadinijad would win the elections so that a final confrontation between the U.S. and Iran would imminently draw near. Islamist fanatics also supported Ahmadinijad for what appears to be different reasons, but really it is because of the same motive. A quest for confrontation. A death wish for the bloodiest self-fulfilling prophecies of all time, Armageddon.

The new divide cuts deeply through our societies. It disrupts peaceful coexistence in our homelands and our world. It brings the threat of civil war closer to our towns and cities. It competes to control our media and our education systems. In one way, the new divide could be seen as being between the moderate and the traditional. The old and the new. Between the liberals and the conservatives. Between the fanatically religious and the secular. Between those who believe in changeable human laws and those who insist on following what they see as the timeless divine will of God. Between things we can debate and things which some consider to be unbound by time, place or logic. But ultimately, the divide is really between those who believe that our problems can be solved through dialogue, diplomacy, economic cooperation and even sanctions; and those who believe that war is inevitable. The divide is between those who believe that we, with all our differences can co-exist, and those who believe that it is either us or them. Between those who think that we can differ but still maintain amicable relations and those who think that either you are with us, the good, or you are against us siding with the axis of evil. The divide is between fear-mongers and promoters of xenophobia on one hand and those who simply believe that people are more or less the same everywhere on the other.

The national divide in Egypt, Lebanon or Iran is not a simple political disagreement within one agreed framework. It is often a disagreement on the nature of the framework which should govern agreements and disagreements. The debate in Washington about torture is not the result of a political disagreement. It represents a disagreement over a basic moral question, are the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights truly universal? Do Geneva conventions apply equally to us and to others? Are they only binding for others or are they binding for all of us? The same divide occurred a few years ago in the over whether or not the United States has the right to invade Iraq, without a United Nations mandate or a consensus from the international community. The problems in Pakistan are not caused by a minority or an isolated rebel group, they represent a national divide between a large portion of the population who supports or at least sympathizes with Taliban with its extremist and violently confrontational ideology, and moderates who want to resolve conflict through peaceful means and dialogue.

Needless to say, that the absence of an effective and fair International Justice System, stands behind the widening of this divide and the empowerment of the extremist ideology. When peaceful means failed and failed for decades, violence started to be marketed as a potentially more successful alternative.

The clash of civilizations assumes that a country or a group of countries belong to a distinctive civilization. Funny enough, the new roles of globalization weaken the validity of such classification. The truth is that the clash is happening within each society. It is a clash of mindsets. A clash of values and personal ideologies. The ideological commonalities cut across societies just like global market segmentation takes place. The clash, therefore, can be more accurately seen as a clash between those who believe in tolerance, diplomacy, peaceful struggle and would only consider war as a last resort in self-defense on one hand and those who believe in exclusivity, violent confrontations and pre-emptive strikes on the other hand.

The reason why many Israeli settlers refuse to leave their illegal settlements is because they believe that this land has been promised to them by God. Many Muslims also believe that they must control Jerusalem because of other religious reasons. During the crusades, Christian warriors believed they had to reclaim the holy land. Too many promises for the same piece of land. Muslims, Christians and Jews sadly have come to believe in Armageddon. The final war where God rewards the righteous, the faithful and the virtuous and delivers victory to his chosen people. The trouble is, each party believes that they are the chosen people. As soon as an attack on Gaza takes place, Muslim mosque preachers of the Friday prayers start telling the stories of Armageddon and how "a rock will tell the faithful that an enemy Jew is hiding behind it, so that the faithful can slay that enemy." Funny enough, the idea of Armageddon had no mention in the Koran and was most likely borrowed by late interpreters from biblical sources. Some Jewish sects and more recently Zionist Christians also believe in Armageddon with different intentions, to say the least. On the way to Armageddon, Islamist extremists, right-wing Neocon extremists, Zionist extremists, do all go hand in hand, till they arrive to the battlefield of course, there it will be a different story of which no one will live to tell. Perhaps Armageddon was once necessary as a potent psychological mobilization mechanism for survival in the past. But times have changed. Armageddon has become the scariest self-fulfilling prophecy of all times. But the good news is, as much as it is self-fulfilling it also is surely self-defeating.

The idea that there is a chosen nation, or a chosen people, or children of God, despite being so deeply rooted in the religious beliefs of Muslims, Christians and Jews is self-defeating because it gives moral justification to the notion that some of us are better or "more equal than others". The struggle of who exactly is better will continue to fuel war and conflict till doom's day, AKA Armageddon. One thing is for sure, Man, by his very nature seeks equality and freedom and rejects bondage and inferior treatment. Thus, ideologies which favor one race, one nation or one religion can fuel wars for centuries, but because Man ultimately seeks peace, safety, comfort and prosperity, these ideas are at the end self-defeating.

Armageddon, at least in the way it is currently being taught, is an illusion. Not because wars will never happen. Unfortunately we will witness wars every now and then. But the idea that Armageddon is a final war whereby one religion or one people will win an ultimate victory, military or otherwise, and then reign supreme happily ever after, as the world witnesses "the end of history", will just never happen. Wars, straight or asymmetric will just continue to erupt until a world order of equality and justice is established. Man will always seek freedom, dignity and equality and this will ultimately defeat Nazism, fascism and promoters of any sort of exclusive supremacy to any group, nation, race, religion or civilization.

But as for now, this divide will continue, until such time that the ominous promise of Armageddon is finally discredited.

Obama's New Beginning

Obama’s “New Beginning”:

Delivering on the Issue of Settlements

The people have started to deliver. The Lebanese people have just voted for U.S.-backed 14th March coalition and prevented Hezbollah from taking over the parliament and controlling the government. In today's elections in Iran, CNN is reporting heavy voter turnout. The Iranian opposition rally stepped up its pace significantly in the last week. A 17-km human chain of opposition ran across the Capital Tehran and signs show that the Obama Effect is giving the moderate Moussavi a great push. Young voters, who abstained in the last election, are vowing to participate this time and many are determined to vote against Ahmadinejad. Women are also showing up in great numbers demanding freedom in a country where women are suppressed by a conservative regime. Ahmadinijad may not be ousted this time, but growing number of people are favoring moderation over extremism. The people are starting to do their part. But is President Obama doing his?

If we regard Obama's "New Beginning" speech as the preamble of an informal collective contract then each party, Muslims, Arabs, Israelis and Americans; must play its role and honor its commitments and obligations. The people's commitment is to support tolerance and vote against extremism. This has happened in Lebanon and there are positive signs coming out of Tehran. It is also happening in Israel, where hard line Netanyahu is re-thinking his position towards a Palestinian State as many Israelis seem to be supporting Obama's "New Beginning".

Just like Roosevelt's "New Deal" made it to history books, Obama's "New Beginning" is also making a historical ripple effect that has approached Arab and Persian shores. Now, it is time for Obama to make good on his promises. It is time he follows through on his words. People of this region may be too emotional and will give even an American President the benefit of the doubt. But they are not stupid. They paid in advance but they expect that Mr. Obama will deliver.

Quick and early dividends could be realized on the issue of the illegal Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territories. Obama confirmed his commitment to strongly oppose these illegal settlements. Now this is the time for him to deliver some actions to back his words. What we propose here is not big, but it is rather symbolic.

For years, the United States has placed very strict regulations on fund-raising activities related to financing Islamist or extremist organizations. Now it is time that Obama sends a bill to the Hill to block fundraising activities in the United States if the funds would be funneled to Israel to finance the building of illegal Israeli settlements. This does not affect other fund-raising activities going to Israel. Just the funding of illegal settlements which should be curbed. Currently, generous donations from U.S. citizens are used to build new illegal settlements, expand existing settlements and rebuild those settlements which are dismantled by the Israeli government. And to add a spoon of sugar to this bitter medicine, the United States could offer to assist Israel in developing urban engineering solutions to accommodate population growth in areas where Israel sees the problem most troubling.

Ahmadinejad might still be able to keep his seat. But even if he does, something has fundamentally changed. Ahmadinejad has announced that he wants to meet face-to-face with Obama and "debate" the issues standing between the two countries. Obama's "New Beginning" is unstoppable. The only one who can stall Obama's "New Beginning" is Obama himself; If he fails to follow through on his promises. Just like Bush failed to follow through on his commitment to democracy, crushing the hopes on the "Spring of Change", Obama could destroy his own "New Beginning" before it even begins to happen. The only thing Obama needs to do now is to nurse his own "New Beginning" by delivering even small packets of actions which somehow match the general direction of his promises before this historical window of opportunity vanishes.

By
Wael Nawara, Egypt

Hate-Mongers Panic

Obama Presents a Bold

Vision for Change to Come

Wael Nawara
Posted: June 5, 2009 11:20 AM

Obama Presents a Bold Vision for Change to Come

huffington_post:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wael-nawara/obama-presents-a-bold-vis_b_211811.html


In his historic address to the Islamic World from Cairo, Obama demonstrated that he is more than a charismatic orator. He proved that he is a sensitive courageous world leader who has a vision for making peace and building a better world. Obama extended a steady hand of friendship to Muslims; with dignity, confidence and yet with sincerity and humility. He presented the challenges of having to jointly work together to build such better world. He recognized sources of tension, recent and historical, but he called for moving beyond the past, ending the viscous cycle of suspicion and discord and called for a new beginning. Obama made it clear that he rejected stereotyping against Muslims but he also expected Muslims to drop their stereotyping of the US as an empire which only seeks its self-interest. He cited the great contributions of Islam to human civilization but reminded Muslims with the great achievements of his own country, the United States of America.

As expected, Obama stressed his commitment to fight extremists and to withdraw from Iraq. He vowed to help Pakistan and Afghanistan economically. Obama, however, said things no other president, American or otherwise, has ever dared to say. For instance he spoke of his dream of ridding the world of nuclear weapons. He invited Hamas, an entity which is still on U.S. list of terrorist organizations, to take responsibility in uniting Palestinian people but demanded that it should desert armed resistance seeking just settlement through peaceful struggle. He also invited Iran for a new beginning without preset conditions, recognizing the negative role which the U.S. had played in overthrowing Mosaddegh's democratically elected government in the 50's.

On the issue of freedom of faith, Obama frankly mentioned the disturbing tendency amongst some Muslims to measure one's own faith by the rejection of another's and called for upholding religious diversity -- whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Christian Copts in Egypt. What his eloquent speech did not say but indirectly implied, is that Muslims must pay more attention to what is being taught at their schools, preached at their mosques and communicated in their media. But the same message of tolerance should in fact also go to keen followers of Orthodox Judaism and Christianity; in Israel, the United States and the rest of the world.
Obama made it clear that the United States will not impose any specific form of democracy on countries of the region, but he affirmed his belief that basic human rights and freedoms are universal. He stressed that the United States will support countries which seek modernization and peaceful democratic transformation. He stressed his commitment to women's rights and listed a number of programs to empower women. He finally addressed the issue of economic cooperation and presented several programs designed to foster a spirit of partnership.

The speech was met with mixed reactions but there was a general consensus that his address was visionary, sincere, frank, fair, balanced and uplifting. He inspired his audience and left the people with hope that change is possible. He did not try to please the audience by only saying things they would like to hear omitting positions or commitments that may be problematic or unpopular. For instance he described U.S. bonds with Israel as unbreakable and accused those who question the Holocaust of being ignorant and hateful. More than 2,500 people present in the domed auditorium interrupted Obama's 55-minute speech thirty times with enthusiastic applauds then finally gave him a stand-up ovation as he was ready to leave the stage. The youth in particular received Obama's address with great enthusiasm. In the middle of the speech one member of the audience shouted, "We love you" and Obama responded spontaneously, "I love you too".

The event, which was co-hosted by Al Azhar and Cairo Universities, was held in the main auditorium of Cairo University. The huge hall which hosts three floors was almost full. The invitations of this event were hand-delivered by messengers acting on behalf of Egypt's Presidential Authority and included flags of the United States and Egypt on both sides of the card with Arabic text printed on one side and English on the other. The audience arrived at 10 a.m. but had to wait for three hours as President Obama's speech started at 1 p.m.!
The audience included Ahmed Nazif, the Prime Minister of Egypt, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Egyptian top officials, actors, celebrities, foreign diplomats, politicians, activists and students from Egypt and other Muslim-majority countries, in addition to staff of the US embassy in Cairo. A large number of Muslim and Christian religious scholars and leaders were seated in the front rows acknowledging the role which faith can play in making peace or promoting conflict in this part of the world where many people are keenly religious. The event received heavy coverage from local and international media organizations and Obama's entire visit was televised on air through several Egyptian TV channels, public and private. For the first time, Egyptian Authorities allowed bloggers to cover an event of this nature online.

Outside Cairo University was a small demonstration where mainly American and European protestors called on Obama to stop supporting Israel's siege of Gaza. This demonstration was obviously tolerated by the security forces in an effort from the Egyptian regime to remind Obama of the order of priorities! Shops and Kiosks in the area surrounding Cairo University were instructed to shut down for the day. Cairo streets, usually crowded with heavy traffic, were largely empty as most businesses and schools took the day off. On why the speech was scheduled for Thursday and not on Friday, which is the weekend holiday in Egypt, some speculated that the reason was to avoid potential angry riots organized by extremist Islamists which could have erupted following Friday's prayers springing out of the security authorities' control.

The audience, mostly Egyptians, loved Obama and admired his charisma. Obama used quotations from the Quran, Bible and Talmud several times. He showed depth in understanding the complex history and problems of the region. "He did not refer to the printed speech not even once!" many people made that remark, funnily enough, to add to Obama's legendary presentation skills. Most of the audience present in the auditorium or following the televised speech from home did not realize that Obama was reading the speech from transparent teleprompters strategically located on both sides in front of the podium. "Afla7 in Sadak" meaning "he will do well if he stays true to his words and delivers on his promises," this was another comment shared by many of those who followed the speech. They loved what Obama said and wished that there was a way to realize these aspirations of peace and prosperity.

His strong commitment for peace and human rights made one of the audience members say that "Obama is just too courageous! He is the bravest U.S. President since Kennedy. I hope he does not meet his tragic fate." Obama, however, stressed that building this desirable future must happen through partnership. That it is a joint responsibility and not a task that he or the United States can bring about alone.

Critics, including members of "Kifaya" movement, however, regarded Obama's visit as an attempt to bestow undeserved legitimacy over a repressive regime and saw Obama's speech addressing the Muslim world as no more than a PR stunt designed to deceive Muslims and Arabs. One day before his visit Obama had described Mubarak as a pillar of wisdom and stability in the region. "Kifaya," the word literally means "enough," which seeks to end Mubarak's 28-year authoritarian grip on power, viewed the visit and the address as a gimmick which aimed at distracting Arabs and Muslims from the fact that the United States main interests in the region are to guarantee Israel's security and supremacy and to ensure that the U.S. controls the region's vast oil reserves through oppressive regimes which are merely puppets dancing to US commands. Obama's speech was therefore weak on democracy and human rights by design. Some critics saw that the overwhelming enthusiasm with which Egyptians greeted Obama reflected a deficit in leadership in their own constituency and a longing for a Messiah who can deliver them out of their long suffering.

In the critics' eyes, Obama demanded that Palestinians give up armed struggle without promising any solid policy changes. Obama did not promise for instance to end an unnecessary U.S. tradition of blocking Security Council resolutions whenever the hint of blame was to be placed on Israel. This decades-long unfortunate tradition is seen as an American obstruction of international justice. As for helping to reach the desired end of a 2-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians, what Obama had to offer was merely his "patience", thus possibly endorsing endless rounds of fruitless negotiations between the Palestinians and Israelis.

Obama confirmed his commitment to strongly oppose illegal Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian lands. This position however, was not accompanied by material policies and consequences should Israel fail to observe international law. The United States placed very stringent regulations on fund raising which may be used to finance extremist Islamist organizations. Obama did not offer or contemplate any remotely similar regulations designed to block fundraising activities in the United States if the funds would be funneled to Israel to finance the building of illegal Israeli settlements. Currently these generous donations from unsuspecting U.S. citizens are used to rebuild even bigger settlements as soon as the Israeli government dismantles some, making a mockery of the American and Israeli administrations' commitment in this regard. Further, Obama did not address the issue of reforming the United Nations, the Security Council structure and its decision-making process or talk about his vision of erecting an effective international justice system at some point in the future.

Critics accuse Obama's speech of being low on substance. Merely a collection of words nicely put together. But words is what speeches are usually made of. Today's address, however, may provide a starting point for a switch of the mindset, a change of heart and a paradigm shift. The dialogue has just started and today's words can provide a new way of thinking our common problems and mutual interests. It may serve as the preamble of an informal collective contract in which each party, Muslims, Arabs, Israelis and Americans must play its role and honor its commitments and obligations.

At the end of the day, actions speak louder than words. Everyone will be watching closely for signs of real change in U.S. policy in days and months to come. Muslims will expect results and actions. Only words were released today. Words which signify dreams of a better future. But if these words and dreams are embraced and nurtured, they can grow and blossom. These aspirations can guide a continued dialogue and set a road map for a better future. Actions and policies to follow, however, is what will make these words and dreams more than rhetoric and turn them into design specifications for a truly better world.

Hate-Mongers Panic
As Obama's Sincerity
Touches the Hearts
Of the People

Read Part I .... at Huffington Post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wael-nawara/obama-presents-a-bold-vis_b_211811.html

Actions and Words

Obama's Speech:

A Public Relations Stunt

Or a Vision

For Real Change

to Come?

As the world's attention is focused on Cairo, in anticipation of Obama's historic visit to Egypt and his address to the Islamic world, Kifaya, the Egyptian Protest movement, earlier today announced its intention to organize a demonstration in Cairo's busiest square tonight in protest of the much publicized visit. The leaders of Kifaya, (the word Kifaya literally means enough in Egyptian), regard the visit as an attempt to bestow undeserved legitimacy over a repressive regime and see Obama's speech addressing the Muslim world as no more than a PR stunt designed to deceive Muslims and Arabs. They view the visit and the address as a gimmick which aims at distracting Arabs and Muslims from the fact that the United States main interest in the region is to guarantee Israel's security and supremacy in addition to ensure that the U.S. controls the region's vast oil reserves through oppressive regimes which are merely puppets serving the US interests. Even in the United States itself, analysts are warning from losing this historic opportunity in rhetoric which does little in dealing with the real issues. The message they give is that actions matter more than words.

It is true that nothing can be said tomorrow, which in itself is capable of bringing about Obama's promise of hope and change. Only actions and policies to follow can do that. All that can be hoped from tomorrow's speech is to set a vision and a road map for the future marking a new phase of U.S.-Muslim relations. The people, however, will be watching out at how this vision is to be turned into actions in the months and years to come.

Tomorrow's speech can provide a starting point for a switch of the mindset, a change of heart and a paradigm shift. It should provide a new way of thinking our common problems and mutual interests. It may serve as the preamble of an informal collective contract in which each party must play its role and honor its commitments and obligations.

On this historic occasion, Obama may ask Muslims to pay more attention to what is being taught at their schools, preached at their mosques and communicated in their media. Incitement of hatred, the attitude of having a total monopoly over the truth, exclusion and self-righteousness when taught to young minds and shared by the elites and the masses on a national level will eventually lead to imminent clash and conflict. The same message of tolerance should be relayed to keen followers of Orthodox Judaism and Christianity; in Israel, the United States and the rest of the world.

Obama must also demand that the regimes adopt a long term approach of modernization and peaceful democratic transformation of Arab and Muslim countries. Reforms that would protect human rights, enshrine equality, create opportunity, celebrate diversity; pluralism and rejoice liberty. A true partnership for prosperity between the United States and countries of the region should see timely implementation of such reforms.

On the other hand, for Obama's speech to become more than a public relations stunt, Obama must also promise change in the American ways of conducting foreign affairs.

For starters, the United States should reverse an unnecessary tradition of blocking Security Council resolutions whenever the hint of blame is to be placed on Israel. This decades-long unfortunate tradition was equal to the United States' blocking of justice since U.N. Security Council is just about the only apparatus man has so far devised for collectively serving international justice. Second, the idea that negotiations alone between the Palestinians and Israelis can bring about a just peace is not realistic and has led to endless rounds of fruitless negotiations. Meanwhile, things on the ground were constantly changing creating even crueler realities for Palestinians. Peace became like an evasive mirage. Third, we are heartened to hear the new administration's commitment to a two-state solution and its strong position against illegal Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian lands. This position however, must have material consequences should Israel fail to match its commitments.

For instance, the United States placed very stringent regulations on fund raising which will be used to finance extremist Islamist organizations Similarly, the new Administration must put in place equally strict regulations designed to block fundraising activities in the United States if the funds will be funneled to Israeli for financing building of illegal Israeli settlements. Currently these generous donations from unsuspected U.S. citizens are used to even rebuild bigger settlements as soon as the Israeli government dismantles some, making a mockery of the American and Israeli administrations' commitment in this regard.

At the end, change and global security is not the responsibility of America, Israel, the Arabs and Muslims alone. Obama should demand that all nations must work towards the creation of the better world we all seek, through compassion, economic cooperation and diligent efforts which aim at reforming the United Nations, the Security Council structure and its decision making process, as to finally erect an effective international justice system at some point in the future. A system which will significantly reduce conflict, violence and human suffering as it invests in our common humanity to enhance our common security and world peace at large.

Yes. It is true that actions speak louder than words, but it is words that will be exchanged tomorrow. Words which can create this shift of mindset and set a road map for a better future. Actions and policies to follow, however, is what will make these words more than rhetoric and turn them into design specifications for a truly better world.

By:

Wael Nawara

Actions and Words

Obama's Speech:

A Public Relations Stunt

or A Vision

for Things to Come?

As the world's attention is focused on Cairo, in anticipation of Obama's historic visit to Egypt and his address to the Islamic world, Kifaya, the Egyptian Protest movement, earlier today announced its intention to organize a demonstration in Cairo's busiest square tonight in protest of the much publicized visit. The leaders of Kifaya, (the word Kifaya literally means enough in Egyptian), regard the visit as an attempt to bestow undeserved legitimacy over a repressive regime and see Obama's speech addressing the Muslim world as no more than a PR stunt designed to deceive Muslims and Arabs. They view the visit and the address as a gimmick which aims at distracting Arabs and Muslims from the fact that the United States main interest in the region is to guarantee Israel's security and supremacy in addition to ensure that the U.S. controls the region's vast oil reserves through oppressive regimes which are merely puppets serving the US interests. Even in the United States itself, analysts are warning from losing this historic opportunity in rhetoric which does little in dealing with the real issues. The message they give is that actions matter more than words.

It is true that nothing can be said tomorrow, which in itself is capable of bringing about Obama's promise of hope and change. Only actions and policies to follow can do that. All that can be hoped from tomorrow's speech is to set a vision and a road map for the future marking a new phase of U.S.-Muslim relations. The people, however, will be watching out at how this vision is to be turned into actions in the months and years to come.

Tomorrow's speech can provide a starting point for a switch of the mindset, a change of heart and a paradigm shift. It should provide a new way of thinking our common problems and mutual interests. It may serve as the preamble of an informal collective contract in which each party must play its role and honor its commitments and obligations.

On this historic occasion, Obama may ask Muslims to pay more attention to what is being taught at their schools, preached at their mosques and communicated in their media. Incitement of hatred, the attitude of having a total monopoly over the truth, exclusion and self-righteousness when taught to young minds and shared by the elites and the masses on a national level will eventually lead to imminent clash and conflict. The same message of tolerance should be relayed to keen followers of Orthodox Judaism and Christianity; in Israel, the United States and the rest of the world.

Obama must also demand that the regimes adopt a long term approach of modernization and peaceful democratic transformation of Arab and Muslim countries. Reforms that would protect human rights, enshrine equality, create opportunity, celebrate diversity; pluralism and rejoice liberty. A true partnership for prosperity between the United States and countries of the region should see timely implementation of such reforms.

On the other hand, for Obama's speech to become more than a public relations stunt, Obama must also promise change in the American ways of conducting foreign affairs.

For starters, the United States should reverse an unnecessary tradition of blocking Security Council resolutions whenever the hint of blame is to be placed on Israel. This decades-long unfortunate tradition was equal to the United States' blocking of justice since U.N. Security Council is just about the only apparatus man has so far devised for collectively serving international justice. Second, the idea that negotiations alone between the Palestinians and Israelis can bring about a just peace is not realistic and has led to endless rounds of fruitless negotiations. Meanwhile, things on the ground were constantly changing creating even crueler realities for Palestinians. Peace became like an evasive mirage. Third, we are heartened to hear the new administration's commitment to a two-state solution and its strong position against illegal Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian lands. This position however, must have material consequences should Israel fail to match its commitments.

For instance, the United States placed very stringent regulations on fund raising which will be used to finance extremist Islamist organizations Similarly, the new Administration must put in place equally strict regulations designed to block fundraising activities in the United States if the funds will be funneled to Israeli for financing building of illegal Israeli settlements. Currently these generous donations from unsuspected U.S. citizens are used to even rebuild bigger settlements as soon as the Israeli government dismantles some, making a mockery of the American and Israeli administrations' commitment in this regard.

At the end, change and global security is not the responsibility of America, Israel, the Arabs and Muslims alone. Obama should demand that all nations must work towards the creation of the better world we all seek, through compassion, economic cooperation and diligent efforts which aim at reforming the United Nations, the Security Council structure and its decision making process, as to finally erect an effective international justice system at some point in the future. A system which will significantly reduce conflict, violence and human suffering as it invests in our common humanity to enhance our common security and world peace at large.

Yes. It is true that actions speak louder than words, but it is words that will be exchanged tomorrow. Words which can create this shift of mindset and set a road map for a better future. Actions and policies to follow, however, is what will make these words more than rhetoric and turn them into design specifications for a truly better world.

By

Wael Nawara

Obama vs. Obama

Obama Egypt Speech:

Will Obama The Man Keep Up With Obama The Legend?

Read this in Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/01/obama-egypt-speech-will-o_n_209932.html

Obama vs. Obama

During his visit to Cairo, Obama can write a new chapter in history. The idea that the American President will address Islamic Nations from Cairo, capital of Egypt and home to Al Azhar University carries a symbolic gesture that can open the door for a new era of dialogue and understanding between the West and Muslims. For decades, Muslims have been accumulating negative feelings of victimization and accusing the U.S. of using double standards especially as a result of the lingering Palestinian suffering. Muslims blame the U.S. for its blind support to Israel shielding it from Security Council resolutions and international justice. During the last 8 years, the curve of the relationship dived to its lowest levels ever, with President Bush’s decision to invade Afghanistan and Iraq and his “War on Terror” which Muslims saw as being mainly directed against them.

The war against extremism and violence, however, is a war of minds and hearts. Hearts that could never be won through use of military power or invasion. With every civilian casualty falling in the crossfire in Iraq for instance, the U.S. would acquire new enemies and lose potential friends. The war against fanaticism should have been fought against injustice, intolerance, poverty and oppression. It should have been fought through creation of opportunity, hope and change of dire circumstances leading to frustration and despair. This gesture to address Muslim grievances comes at a critical hour in the history of our world. This opportunity may not come again.

The war against extremism, hatred and exclusion is everyone’s war. Obama should engage Muslims everywhere to side with peace, freedom and tolerance. During his campaign, Obama enjoyed tremendous support in this part of the world. People placed very high hopes on Obama to deliver the change he promised and fix what they saw as decades-long problems. Upon his historic victory, most Muslims cheered and celebrated. The biggest challenge facing the American President is this image of a Superhero-Obama who can fix all problems and solve all complex issues. Obama must therefore walk on very thin ice in trying to balance between aspirations and realities. Between promises and policies. Between what is said now and what can practically be implemented during his term or terms as a President. For instance he must try to balance between Israel’s security and Palestinian rights. Between amicable relations with existing regimes ruling Muslim countries and long-term friendship with the people who regard these regimes as oppressive and corrupt. Between regional stability and demands for reform and democracy.

Some pessimists regard the choice of Cairo as the venue for this historic address as blow which undermines U.S. commitment to democracy and human rights. Supporters of neocon hard-line confrontational approaches are now saying “we told you so”, pointing out that this choice of venue gives a blank check to oppressive regimes and shows that the new administration’s support for democracy in the Middle East has waned. Aly Eddin Helal, a senior ranking member of the ruling NDP party in Egypt, in an interview with Al Ahram Daily paper last Friday, saw the visit as a signal that critics of the Egyptian regime who had been calling for democracy, reform and respect of human rights have lost their bets. Optimists, on the other hand, believe that Obama’s policy of using soft power, with publicized friendly gestures towards governments carries a less visible side within. They believe that tough diplomacy demanding progress and reform behind closed doors has been much more effective than Bush’s blunt rhetoric which was ill-received and produced negative reactions from old stubborn leaders in an area of the world where public scolding leads to losing face.

The stakes are high and so are the expectations. Muslims will listen to Obama and he has a chance to get to their hearts and minds. He can frankly tell Muslims that they need to change their ways. But he has to provide them with alternative means of getting their justice. The United Nations and the structure of the Security Council have both failed to justly address Muslim issues. This contributed to rise of terrorism and political advances enjoyed by extremist political factions. Obama now has what no other Western leader have ever had, a feeling amongst people in this part of the world that they can relate to him. That he in turn can relate to them and understand suffering of the weak and the marginalized. That their pleas can find sympathetic ears from someone who managed to move through the ranks and achieve what was once considered an impossible accomplishment. Obama remains hero of the people. And that is a tough place to be. Obama the man has to try hard to keep up with Obama the legend. This is the challenge before Obama.

Written By
Ayman Nour
&
Wael Nawara

Motherhood, if not for Love

Egypt

Mother of the World

By:
Wael Nawara

Motherhood is pain. Pure and simple. A new fetus inside a mother’s womb exhausts her every resource. In fact, we can accurately think of this new “life” as a parasite living inside the mother feeding on her guts and sucking her blood. But because of love, it is a parasite that is celebrated, nurtured and protected. The pain does not end with the invariably long and agonizing process of delivery. In fact birth is immediately followed by a period of sleep deprivation and post-partum depression. Not only does the mother lose considerable part of her health reserves during pregnancy and nursing, but usually she also gains weight. So she becomes bigger but weaker! Less attractive and more vulnerable! Ya3 ! All of this is followed by a life of unpaid slave-labor, sleeplessness and emotional abuse eventually rewarded by desertion and abandonment.

During this miserably happy life, the mother takes up a large number of professions and plays countless roles to the child(ren) and to the man who agrees to play father, if any. The mother is expected to be a cook, cleaner, math teacher, priest, story-teller, lullaby singer, family driver, weight lifter, psychiatrist, defender of the family, scape-goat, lover, disciplinarian, milk-bottle, washing machine, iron, dishwasher, 24-hour restaurant, an exotic mistress, coffee-maker, home-tutor, alarm-clock, plumber, computer, finance minister or rather magician, tailor, hair-dresser, make-up artist, shoe-shiner, hand-kerchief, esteem-booster, doormat, nurse, host, back-rubber, massager, map-reader, mind-reader and why not also a successful career woman. And at the end, the children can’t wait to ungratefully leave. Sucks, doesn’t it? But the only thing which makes all this bearable is love. In short, if not for love, motherhood sucks. Without the enduring power of love, a mother would be better off strangling her child upon birth to get done with it!

Pain, But Where is the Love?
Egyptians cling on to that motherhood status for Egypt. I guess it is fateful, geographically speaking. It is geopolitically meant to be and there is nothing we can do about it but to adapt to and deal with it. Egypt, as Egyptians never tire from describing it, is the mother of the world. And for that Egyptians have to put up with all kinds of pain. Pain, yes, but is there love?

Not only did Egypt have to endure the longest period of occupation any other country in the world has witnessed, but we also had to be nice to our invaders to the extent of hating ourselves in compliance with their scriptures. For a few thousand years, Egypt was safe like a distant island in an endless ocean of sand. Following an alleged first union around 4,200 BC Egyptians enjoyed 2,500 years of isolation, slowly developing their highly evolved civilization. This took place till wheel-chariots were invented and used by the Hyksos to defeat Egyptians in around 1,650 BC. The Hyksos ruled for about 100 years till they were kicked out by kings of the 17th and 18th Dynasties and Ahmose reunited the land. Egyptians learned a tough lesson, that their peaceful nature and initial “imperial reluctance” served their greedy enemies who drawled over enviable civilization of the black land and craved to suckle from its riches.

Warrior monarchs of the New Kingdoms had to spend as much time abroad on military campaigns as they would spend at home, to set up advanced defense lines and early warning outposts. But it was a matter of time before the imbalance between Egypt’s appeal as a colony and its unpreparedness to ruthlessly build and guard an empire would betray its vulnerability to conquest. For several centuries Egyptians managed to drive out conquerors one by one. The Hittites, the Assyrians, the Libyans, the Ethiopians, the Persians but at the end, Egypt was as exhausted like a gazelle which has been singled out and persistently attacked by a pride of hungry lions all day. Egypt fell around 332 BC into the strong hands of Alexander the Great. Then the Romans came. Then the Arabs. Then the Turks and eventually the French and the Brits.

Drained Health and Wealth
Century after century, Egypt was robbed, raped and drained from its resources which would be shipped to Rome, Greece, London, Istanbul or Arabia. The French estimated that the population of Egypt was about 2.5 million inhabitants by 1800 AD. Compared to an estimated population of 8 million around the 2nd century BC, when the world was far less populous, Egypt was dying and its relative weight in world population may have dropped by ninety something percent from what it once was. Great empires suckled from Egypt’s riches and knowledge and relied on its strategic position as a foothold in the center of the crossroads of the world to control their kingdoms. Egypt was slowly dying, while giving birth to one empire after another. Egyptian crops, artifacts, skilled artisans and craftsmen were consistently shipped to the capital of the empire, wherever this may be. Egyptian farmers and merchants had to endure harsh tax rates which would only be increased by each new imperial power.

Knock Down the Pyramids?
You Gotta Be Kidding Me!
But perhaps the worst came when we began to develop a form of self-hatred as Egyptians started to adopt Abrahimic religions. Developing a little grudge between neighboring nations is a phenomenon which reoccurs almost everywhere. You find it between the Welsh and English, Danish and Swedes, Dutch and Belgians, and so on. But when that grudge is documented and enshrined into a complete set of Holy Scriptures of a faith which you subscribe to, a most awkward situation occurs. Many Muslims and Christians have come to despise their pre-Islamic and pre-Christian heritage as they were wrongly taught that the Bible and the Quran say that their ancestors were evil aggressive pagans. Paganism, it is evident, is poorly understood and is not at all stomached in strict monotheistic bellies. Just recently we started to hear fanatics calling for the destruction of the old Egyptian temples, pyramids, statues and icons. Only because these temples currently provide jobs and living for people working in the tourism industry, these pagan icons may temporarily be spared, but only until such time as when the Grand Islamic State is erected, at which time the wealth of the promised State will be so immense, thank God, such that these pagan temples and monuments will be deemed useless and then they should be mercilessly knocked down according to the extremists doctrine. (See a Dialogue with a Medical Student from the Muslim Brothers).

Sister, Mother, Whatever,

But Where is the Love?
Arabs also often use this term “The Oldest Sister”, not necessarily the mother, to describe Egypt at times. Usually these are the times when their media stations had been throwing all sorts of accusations of treason and other insults over Egypt and there is an uproar of a backfire from Egyptians. Egyptians working in the petro-dollar states have often have been so badly mistreated in some of their host Arab countries basically because Egypt has recently become relatively poorer as compared to the younger brothers and sisters of the petrodollar era.

Invited to your Funerals

But never your Weddings
Whether Egypt is an older sister or a struggling mother, the position surely comes with a lot of unwanted perks but with little love. I am not against forging strong relations with any neighbor, brother or sister, but I suggest that we start to re-examine the bill that comes along and demand that love must be a two-way street. Give and take ya3ni ya A7’ey.

For starters, we cannot help anyone if we do not start by acknowledging and appreciating who we are. With all respect to Christianity and Islam which Egyptians have adopted for two thousand years or so, Egypt worshipped Aser or 3aser for some 4,500 years. Our history does not start with Saint Mark or with Amr Ebn El 3ass ! We cannot help anyone else before we help ourselves. We cannot unite with anyone else before we ourselves are united in pride and appreciation and awe, yes awe, of our own heritage. The stories that our ancestors were evil tyrant pagans are just a load of bull. Our ancestors were just as good as the ancestors of any other nation if not kinder. You scan history of the Islamic States or Christian Roman Empires to see the real horrors of prosecution and abuse of religion for worldly benefits.

Second, this issue of the being the mother or the big sister or whatever, must come in both ways. If we are to take the liabilities we must also enjoy the “love” and benefit from the respect which comes with the status. I do not see any younger brothers or sisters paying tributes to the old sister who got tired of nursing, protecting and fighting on their behalf for so long till she was wiped out clean. We see the brothers and sisters placing billions of their dollars in American and European banks and investment houses such that they have lost about a trillion dollars in the recent economic crisis as stocks and property prices collapsed. Yet we do not see much of this love invested here with the big tired sister.

I advise Egypt’s Strong Man, to really act like a Strong Man and have a heart-to-heart talk with these little brothers and sisters. It is for the collective good of everybody! He should start by telling them about a proverb in Egypt which says, “You always invite me to your funerals but not once to a single wedding”. He should say: “To tell you the truth guys, the mother is high and dry and the time has come, sons, daughters, brothers and sisters for you to give back a little so that your grandchildren can find something to suckle upon. Motherhood is painful, my children, if not for love. Come on. Give back a little love you mother-lovers!”