Common Ground News Service
**********
Report this from Sudan
Ellen Davis
Durham, North Carolina - Apostasy is the term applied to religious conversion by those who abhor it, who see conversion as a form of betrayal — of family, community, even nation. Underlying the accusation of apostasy is the understanding that religious conviction and practice are public matters. The supposition of many, across both East and West, that religion is a matter of personal salvation and therefore concerns only God and the individual, has not been widely shared by most peoples and cultures throughout history.
Both the term and the intense emotions that attach to it belong to the special mindset of the three monotheistic faiths, namely Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
One might reason that conversions from one monotheistic religion to another should not arouse hostility, since all monotheisms acknowledge the one God of Abraham and prohibit any other. Yet history consistently shows otherwise. The persecution of "apostates" began as soon as there existed more than one form of monotheism. The 1st century Jew, Saul of Tarsus — better known as St. Paul — had a successful career tracking down and imprisoning Christians, which was terminated only by his own blinding conversion experience. From the 4th century to the mid-20th century, the persecution, massacre or forced conversion of Jews were regular occurrences throughout Christianised Europe. This history of violence, including now the aggressive and militarised forms of proselytising practiced by a small number Islamic groups, is a major factor in the abhorrence of conversion within each of the three monotheistic communities.
There is, however, something new under the sun, namely religiously motivated cooperation among monotheists of different faiths. Sudan might currently be the last place on earth where one would expect to see creative forms of inter-religious cooperation, and at the same time, a diminution of hostility to conversion. Yet such cooperation is evident, especially since the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement between predominantly Muslim Northern Sudan and the largely Christian South. One notable example is a campaign to promote public education about HIV/AIDS, jointly undertaken by the government and churches in Northern Sudan. This is a dramatic shift for the government, which for years denied that Sudanese Muslims suffered from the disease.
Pressure for such cooperation comes from within the Muslim community, both within Sudan and without. Sudanese Muslims are increasingly vocal about their own experiences with HIV/AIDS, and fear a holocaust such as other African countries now suffer. Syria and other Arab states have broken their silence about the reality of AIDS within their own populations.
This new cooperation is also made possible by the fact that many church groups are giving priority to the work of reconciliation. Christians in Sudan are reaching out in new ways, crossing boundaries between Muslims and Christians as well as between Christians of different tribes, in order to heal wounds left by more than 20 years of unabated war.
The churches of Southern Sudan have created much of whatever fragile infrastructure exists there. Church-based clinics, schools and flood-relief teams provide services to all residents, regardless of their religion. Schools offer a secular curriculum, focusing on reading, writing, language, math and computer competency. In many areas, even devout Muslim parents are choosing these schools over madrassas (Islamic religious schools), because they believe the modern curriculum promises the best future for their children.
The church-run schools are staffed by both Muslims and Christians. Classes in religion are taught with the children receiving instruction in their own traditions: education — not conversion — is the object. The headmistress of one church-run school, a Muslim, recently married a Christian in the same village; neither converted, since inter-religious marriage has been legalised by the new government of Southern Sudan. Even when the question of conversion does occur, it does not tear apart the community that has formed for the sake of education. If a child expresses a desire to convert, the parents are informed, and their wishes for the child are respected by the school.
These Sudanese Muslims and Christians are not religiously apathetic, nor are they religious relativists — most of them are strongly committed to their own traditions. Yet their very commitment is resulting in forms of cooperation that lower and even bring down walls of separation that the three monotheisms have often erected and reinforced. These educational initiatives are thus traditional and at the same time innovative, even revolutionary. In a place like Sudan, probably that strange combination is the only thing that might yet bring healing, build communities and create a future for a people who has seen far more war than peace.
###
* Ellen F. Davis, professor of Bible and practical theology at Duke University, is active in theological education in Southern Sudan. She has long been engaged in inter-religious study and dialogue. This article is part of a series on apostasy and proselytism distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News (CGNews), 9 October 2007, www.commongroundnews.org.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
~Youth Views~ Iran-US relations: a path of disaster or a path of hope
Douglas Foote and Dives Diaves
Boston, Massachusetts/Twin Cities, Minnesota - When it comes to foreign policy toward Iran, Americans have been continually let down. Overreaching US intervention was one of the many roots of the Iranian Revolution in 1979, which in turn was a factor in making the Middle East a more dangerous place for Americans. This was demonstrated quite fiercely and memorably by the taking of American hostages. When George W. Bush took office, there was much optimism that he – with his pragmatic governing record – could be to Iran what Nixon was to China.
Since September 11, 2001, however, the United States has reverted from a multilateral foreign policy approach to aggressive unilateralism. Despite the conciliatory messages coming out of Iran following 9/11, and the shared strategic goal of eliminating the Taliban in Afghanistan, Bush and his advisors made the decision to view Iran as an adversary. The language coming out of the administration has been so harsh that many see military conflict with Iran as inevitable.
Thousands of miles away, another hard-line leader took office. Tehran mayor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won the Iranian presidential election of 2005. Like Bush, Ahmadinejad is prone to making statements that are not conducive to diplomacy and negotiation, such as his public assertion that Israel should be "wiped off the map", the rollback of his moderate predecessor's open door policy toward international organisations, and his numerous condemnations of Bush which blur the line between policy criticism and personal attack.
The conduct and policies of both the Bush and Ahmadinejad administrations are detrimental to the already tense atmosphere in the Middle East. However, Iran and the United States – despite their differences in creed, culture and worldview – have a great deal to learn and benefit from each other.
Bush can benefit politically by taking such a hard-line stance against an Islamic nation in the wake of 9/11, and Ahmadinejad can shore up support for his regime by pointing out the evils of America's war in Iraq and support for the "Zionist entity" of Israel, but the poll results and cheering crowds are only fleeting gains. They ignore the possibility of a relationship that could have a positive, stabilising effect on the region for years to come.
There appears to be a gap in both countries between the peoples' wishes and governments' actions. According to a June 2007 CNN-Opinion Research Corporation Poll, only 30% of those polled were in favour of the Iraq War, and given the current climate, a military confrontation with Iran holds little sway.
Recently, Americans voiced their opposition to the administration and its policies at the ballot box and took control of the legislature away from Bush's Republican Party in an election that was seen largely as a referendum on the current administration's failed policy in Iraq. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, an intellectual and military architect of post-9/11 Middle East policy, resigned in the wake of the new elections.
Similarly, Iran's population (two-thirds of which is under the age of 30), while generally considered socially restricted, has expressed its desire for change by way of protest, online publications, and elections.
A recent city council election in Tehran gave victory to two supporters of Ahmadinejad and 11 of his opponents. A poll conducted in May 2005 by the Amir Kabir University found a mere 5% to10% of respondents support the religious conservatives and 85% support a secular democracy, numbers that led columnist Thomas Friedman to call Iran "the ultimate red state."
Clearly, both the American and Iranian citizenry are focused more on solving the problems that currently exist than causing new ones.
There is a need for a change in attitude and shift in language in the Bush administration. While Iran is indeed a strategic competitor in the Middle East, this does not make them "evil". Even though the Iranian president may not express overwhelming gratitude towards more conciliatory language, the main audience should be Iran's youth, which is more liberal, democratically minded, and politically active than former generations. It is important to act strongly and fairly to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and to eliminate the emergence of radical individuals, regimes, and non-state actors that thrive on conflicts in the region.
In order for Iran to become a regional leader in one of the more tumultuous area of the world, Ahmadinejad must act in a way that engenders respect. Stop aid to Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Shi'a militias in Iraq. Involvement in two of the bloodiest conflicts of the decade – whether it is direct or not – is not something that garners favour with a populace that feels its domestic needs are not being addressed.
After 9/11, the Iraq invasion, the Israeli-Hezbollah War and all the other ongoing conflicts in the region, do we really need more talk of violence? These two men can either walk down a path of disaster or a path of hope, and we pray that they choose the latter.
###
* Douglas Foote, is a student of political science, communication and media studies at Tufts University and Dives Diaves is majoring in political science at the University of Minnesota. They co-wrote this article as part of the Soliya's intercultural dialogue program. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News (CGNews), 9 October 2007, www.commongroundnews.org.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Muslim, Jewish and Christian Women tour the US
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Susanne Waldorf, Program Director
Partners for Peace
Cell phone: 641-220-3147
E-mail: susanne.partnersforpeace@gmail.com
Muslim, Jewish & Christian Women Tour US:
Israelis & Palestinians Living with War & Building for Peace
“Jerusalem Women Speak: Three Women, Three Faiths, One Shared Vision”
National US Speaking Tour -- Oct. 27 to Nov. 18, 2007
What does it take to build peace after decades of persecution, war, occupation and conflict? Rarely do we see Israelis and Palestinians -- who have suffered the death of loved ones, through persecution and war, loss of their ancestral homes and discrimination -- working together to envision a new future.
Three women -- Christian, Jew, and Muslim -- whose families have suffered the realities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will discuss current realities and their hope of a better future for all. They will speak about ongoing efforts to cooperate peacefully to solve problems built on sixty years of conflict and military occupation.
* Wejdan Jaber, a Muslim Palestinian from Gaza; a USAID “Clinton Scholar,” holds an MA in Public Administration & International Management from the Monterey Institute for International Studies, Monterey, California.
In 1948 her parents and grandparents fled Al-Maghar village, leaving behind two houses and farms where her family had lived for generations. They were given haven in a UNRWA Palestinian Refugee camp and later moved to Gaza city where Wejdan was born and raised.
* Abir Kopty, a Christian Palestinian citizen of Israel; nominated as one of Israel’s twelve “People of the Year” in 2005, was the first Arab woman participant in a prime time socio-political reality TV show on Israel’s commercial Channel 2.
She was born & raised in Nazareth where her family had lived for generations; now, because of its annexation into the Israeli state in 1948, they are treated as second-class citizens.
Ms. Kopty has been active in the Coalition of Women for Peace & in Ta'ayush, an Arab-Jewish collaborative effort to eliminate segregation and racism inside of Israel and between people in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
* Hagit Ra’anan, a Jewish Israeli; her parents were members of the Irgun -- a clandestine Zionist paramilitary organization, which fought to establish the state of Israel. Her husband was killed during the 1982 war in Lebanon while serving with the Israeli military. She works with†bereaved Palestinians and Israelis to promote reconciliation and a political solution to put an end to further suffering from ongoing conflict and violence. She also works within Christian, Jewish and Muslim schools in Israel to help create bridges between children now largely isolated from one another.
To schedule Interviews, talk show appearances, editorial board meetings and community presentations contact us. Partners for Peace mission is to help achieve a just and permanent solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For more information on Partners for Peace and the tour visit www.partnersforpeace.org.
-- more --
Partners for Peace 14th National Jerusalem Women Speak tour Schedule:
Tour Schedule:
Washington, DC Saturday, Oct. 27 - Saturday, Nov. 3
Frederick and Hagerstown, MDThursday, Nov. 1 - Friday, Nov. 2
Albuquerque and Santa Fe, NMSunday, Nov. 4 - Tuesday, Nov. 6
Phoenix, AZWednesday, Nov. 7 - Friday, Nov. 9
Las Vegas, NVSunday, Nov. 11 - Tuesday, Nov. 13
LA and Santa Barbara, CAWednesday, Nov. 14 - Sunday, Nov.18
Speakers’ Biographies:
Wejdan Jaber (Age 39)
A Muslim Palestinian from Gaza, Ms. Jaber was awarded a USAID “Clinton Scholarship,” in 2000 and in 2002 a Master’s in Public Administration and International Management from the Monterey Institute for International Studies, Monterey, California.
During the 1948 war, Ms. Jaber’s parents, carrying her one-month-old brother, fled Al-Maghar village, leaving behind their two houses and farms where her ancestors had lived for generations. They were sheltered in UNRWA’s Al Buraij refugee camp (south of Gaza City) until the war in 1967, when they moved to Gaza City in search of a safer place to live.
Ms. Jaber underwent five operations during childhood to correct her hips, which had dislocated at birth. Her experience of growing up with a disability, she says, helped her recognize that, as she needed help, she was also able to help others. She volunteered with the General Union of Disabled Palestinians and in 1998 became a board member of this organization.
During the past two years, Ms. Jaber worked as an Academic Counselor on the USAID Presidential Scholarship Program for the Academy for Educational Development (AED).† She was formerly employed in the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Gaza, and the UN Special Coordinator’s Office (UNSCO).
Ms. Jaber currently lives in Ramallah, where she serves on the board of Filastiniyat, an organization which advocates for the greater inclusion of women and youth in all aspects of Palestinian society through media and political monitoring programs. As a human rights and women’s rights activist she believes that all human beings are equal and have the right to live their lives in peace and with dignity.
Abir Kopty (Age 32)
A Christian Palestinian citizen of Israel, Ms. Kopty was nominated as one of twelve “People of the Year” in Israel in 2005. She was the first Arab woman participant in a prime time socio-political reality TV show, “Leader Required,” on Israel’s Commercial Channel 2.
Ms. Kopty, formerly the Media Coordinator and Spokeswoman for Mossawa, the Advocacy Center for Arab Citizens in Israel, Haifa, has been a commentator on various Israeli TV and radio programs and a columnist for "Ynet," an Israeli online news website.
A British Council “Chevening Scholar,” Ms. Kopty recently finished a Master’s in Political Communication from the City University of London and now plans to earn a doctoral degree in film production.
She was born and raised in the city of Nazareth where her family has lived for generations. Since the creation of the state of Israel, members of the Arab community in Israel have been treated as second-class citizens and denied national minority status.
Ms. Kopty is active in several political movements and social change organizations focused on feminism, human rights, and Arab-Jewish relations. She is involved in the struggle to end the occupation, the fight to gain full and equal rights for Arab citizens in Israel, and the women's liberation movement, particularly focusing on Arab women’s status in Israel.
She approaches activism with the belief that a lasting peace will be achieved only when political, moral, social and economic justice are secured for all people in Israel and the Occupied†Palestinian Territories, and when all walls dividing them – both physical and psychological - are removed.
Hagit Ra'anan (Age 57)
A Jewish Israeli born in Tel Aviv, Ms. Ra'anan now lives in Kiryat Ono, a city in the Tel Aviv district. Her grandparents, Zionists from Lithuania (Poland at that time) and the Ukraine, left for Palestine in the 1920's, fearing that Europe was on the verge of a catastrophe. Her grandfather's sister chose to remain in Poland and perished in the Holocaust.
Both Ms. Ra'nan's parents were members of the Jewish underground movement to end the British Mandate and create the State of Israel in the late 1940's. At age 18, she completed her compulsory military service in the Gaza Strip.
During the first week of the war in Lebanon in 1982, Ms. Ra'anan's husband was killed in combat near Beirut while serving with the Israeli military. For the last seven years, she has been a member of the Bereaved Families Forum, an organization that brings together bereaved Palestinians and Israelis to promote reconciliation and a political solution that will put an end to violence and further bereavement.
Ms. Ra'anan is the founder of Bridges of Peace, an organization which works on many projects, including visiting children and adults in Israeli hospitals, visiting Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, and coordinating permits for Palestinians to enter Israel. She also works with children in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim schools within Israel to help create a culture of peace and build bridges between these three communities, now largely separate and isolated from one another.
Ms. Ra'anan, a spiritual healer, believes that dialogue and compassionate listening are necessary first steps toward the healing that must take place between Palestinians and Israelis.
This tour is the Fourteenth National Jerusalem Women Speak tour organized by Partners for Peace.
The response to past tours has been remarkable. Audiences have been moved and challenged by our speakers' stories and surprised to learn that today, in the midst of ongoing conflict, Palestinians and Israelis are able to travel together to speak about their lives, their fears, their hopes, and their work for a just and sustainable peace.
#########
Contact:
Susanne Waldorf, Program Director
Partners for Peace
Cell phone: 641-220-3147
E-mail: susanne.partnersforpeace@gmail.com
Muslim, Jewish & Christian Women Tour US:
Israelis & Palestinians Living with War & Building for Peace
“Jerusalem Women Speak: Three Women, Three Faiths, One Shared Vision”
National US Speaking Tour -- Oct. 27 to Nov. 18, 2007
What does it take to build peace after decades of persecution, war, occupation and conflict? Rarely do we see Israelis and Palestinians -- who have suffered the death of loved ones, through persecution and war, loss of their ancestral homes and discrimination -- working together to envision a new future.
Three women -- Christian, Jew, and Muslim -- whose families have suffered the realities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will discuss current realities and their hope of a better future for all. They will speak about ongoing efforts to cooperate peacefully to solve problems built on sixty years of conflict and military occupation.
* Wejdan Jaber, a Muslim Palestinian from Gaza; a USAID “Clinton Scholar,” holds an MA in Public Administration & International Management from the Monterey Institute for International Studies, Monterey, California.
In 1948 her parents and grandparents fled Al-Maghar village, leaving behind two houses and farms where her family had lived for generations. They were given haven in a UNRWA Palestinian Refugee camp and later moved to Gaza city where Wejdan was born and raised.
* Abir Kopty, a Christian Palestinian citizen of Israel; nominated as one of Israel’s twelve “People of the Year” in 2005, was the first Arab woman participant in a prime time socio-political reality TV show on Israel’s commercial Channel 2.
She was born & raised in Nazareth where her family had lived for generations; now, because of its annexation into the Israeli state in 1948, they are treated as second-class citizens.
Ms. Kopty has been active in the Coalition of Women for Peace & in Ta'ayush, an Arab-Jewish collaborative effort to eliminate segregation and racism inside of Israel and between people in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
* Hagit Ra’anan, a Jewish Israeli; her parents were members of the Irgun -- a clandestine Zionist paramilitary organization, which fought to establish the state of Israel. Her husband was killed during the 1982 war in Lebanon while serving with the Israeli military. She works with†bereaved Palestinians and Israelis to promote reconciliation and a political solution to put an end to further suffering from ongoing conflict and violence. She also works within Christian, Jewish and Muslim schools in Israel to help create bridges between children now largely isolated from one another.
To schedule Interviews, talk show appearances, editorial board meetings and community presentations contact us. Partners for Peace mission is to help achieve a just and permanent solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For more information on Partners for Peace and the tour visit www.partnersforpeace.org.
-- more --
Partners for Peace 14th National Jerusalem Women Speak tour Schedule:
Tour Schedule:
Washington, DC Saturday, Oct. 27 - Saturday, Nov. 3
Frederick and Hagerstown, MDThursday, Nov. 1 - Friday, Nov. 2
Albuquerque and Santa Fe, NMSunday, Nov. 4 - Tuesday, Nov. 6
Phoenix, AZWednesday, Nov. 7 - Friday, Nov. 9
Las Vegas, NVSunday, Nov. 11 - Tuesday, Nov. 13
LA and Santa Barbara, CAWednesday, Nov. 14 - Sunday, Nov.18
Speakers’ Biographies:
Wejdan Jaber (Age 39)
A Muslim Palestinian from Gaza, Ms. Jaber was awarded a USAID “Clinton Scholarship,” in 2000 and in 2002 a Master’s in Public Administration and International Management from the Monterey Institute for International Studies, Monterey, California.
During the 1948 war, Ms. Jaber’s parents, carrying her one-month-old brother, fled Al-Maghar village, leaving behind their two houses and farms where her ancestors had lived for generations. They were sheltered in UNRWA’s Al Buraij refugee camp (south of Gaza City) until the war in 1967, when they moved to Gaza City in search of a safer place to live.
Ms. Jaber underwent five operations during childhood to correct her hips, which had dislocated at birth. Her experience of growing up with a disability, she says, helped her recognize that, as she needed help, she was also able to help others. She volunteered with the General Union of Disabled Palestinians and in 1998 became a board member of this organization.
During the past two years, Ms. Jaber worked as an Academic Counselor on the USAID Presidential Scholarship Program for the Academy for Educational Development (AED).† She was formerly employed in the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Gaza, and the UN Special Coordinator’s Office (UNSCO).
Ms. Jaber currently lives in Ramallah, where she serves on the board of Filastiniyat, an organization which advocates for the greater inclusion of women and youth in all aspects of Palestinian society through media and political monitoring programs. As a human rights and women’s rights activist she believes that all human beings are equal and have the right to live their lives in peace and with dignity.
Abir Kopty (Age 32)
A Christian Palestinian citizen of Israel, Ms. Kopty was nominated as one of twelve “People of the Year” in Israel in 2005. She was the first Arab woman participant in a prime time socio-political reality TV show, “Leader Required,” on Israel’s Commercial Channel 2.
Ms. Kopty, formerly the Media Coordinator and Spokeswoman for Mossawa, the Advocacy Center for Arab Citizens in Israel, Haifa, has been a commentator on various Israeli TV and radio programs and a columnist for "Ynet," an Israeli online news website.
A British Council “Chevening Scholar,” Ms. Kopty recently finished a Master’s in Political Communication from the City University of London and now plans to earn a doctoral degree in film production.
She was born and raised in the city of Nazareth where her family has lived for generations. Since the creation of the state of Israel, members of the Arab community in Israel have been treated as second-class citizens and denied national minority status.
Ms. Kopty is active in several political movements and social change organizations focused on feminism, human rights, and Arab-Jewish relations. She is involved in the struggle to end the occupation, the fight to gain full and equal rights for Arab citizens in Israel, and the women's liberation movement, particularly focusing on Arab women’s status in Israel.
She approaches activism with the belief that a lasting peace will be achieved only when political, moral, social and economic justice are secured for all people in Israel and the Occupied†Palestinian Territories, and when all walls dividing them – both physical and psychological - are removed.
Hagit Ra'anan (Age 57)
A Jewish Israeli born in Tel Aviv, Ms. Ra'anan now lives in Kiryat Ono, a city in the Tel Aviv district. Her grandparents, Zionists from Lithuania (Poland at that time) and the Ukraine, left for Palestine in the 1920's, fearing that Europe was on the verge of a catastrophe. Her grandfather's sister chose to remain in Poland and perished in the Holocaust.
Both Ms. Ra'nan's parents were members of the Jewish underground movement to end the British Mandate and create the State of Israel in the late 1940's. At age 18, she completed her compulsory military service in the Gaza Strip.
During the first week of the war in Lebanon in 1982, Ms. Ra'anan's husband was killed in combat near Beirut while serving with the Israeli military. For the last seven years, she has been a member of the Bereaved Families Forum, an organization that brings together bereaved Palestinians and Israelis to promote reconciliation and a political solution that will put an end to violence and further bereavement.
Ms. Ra'anan is the founder of Bridges of Peace, an organization which works on many projects, including visiting children and adults in Israeli hospitals, visiting Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, and coordinating permits for Palestinians to enter Israel. She also works with children in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim schools within Israel to help create a culture of peace and build bridges between these three communities, now largely separate and isolated from one another.
Ms. Ra'anan, a spiritual healer, believes that dialogue and compassionate listening are necessary first steps toward the healing that must take place between Palestinians and Israelis.
This tour is the Fourteenth National Jerusalem Women Speak tour organized by Partners for Peace.
The response to past tours has been remarkable. Audiences have been moved and challenged by our speakers' stories and surprised to learn that today, in the midst of ongoing conflict, Palestinians and Israelis are able to travel together to speak about their lives, their fears, their hopes, and their work for a just and sustainable peace.
#########
Thursday, October 04, 2007
Common Ground News Service Original Commentaries
Title: Iraqi refugees on the road to Damascus
Author: Sami Moubayed
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 04 October 2007
Word Count: 909
Title: Breaking barriers in Brooklyn
Author: Marcia Kannry and Khader El-Yateem with Stephanie Golden
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 04 October 2007
Word Count: 826
Common Ground News Service
**********
Iraqi refugees on the road to Damascus
Sami Moubayed
DAMASCUS – For the most part of nearly three decades, interaction between Syrians and Iraqis was minimal, to say the least—restricted to political fugitives from each country residing in Baghdad and Damascus. Anyone who is someone in Iraq today was a resident of the Syrian capital—Nuri al-Maliki, Jalal Talabani, Masoud al-Barzani, and Ibrahim al-Jaafari. But neither country had an embassy in the other's capital, there were no formal visits, no cultural exchanges, and no linking telephone lines. Syrians wanting a travel permit would get the words "All Arab countries except Iraq" stamped on their passports. The same was done by authorities in Baghdad. Restrictions were briefly lifted in the late 1970s when the two countries teamed up to oppose Egyptian President Anwar al-Sadat's peace deal with Israel, and Iraqis poured into Syria for tourism, education and business.
Today, there are nearly 1.5 million Iraqis in Syria, but contrary to the case three decades ago, they are mostly refugees. They began arriving after the American invasion of March 2003 and are currently entering at a rate of 2000 per day. They now account for about 11% of Syria's 18 million residents. Syria—living up to its Arab nationalist history and convictions—is the only Arab country to allow Iraqis to come freely, obtain temporary residency permits, and own property on its territory.
Within Syria, the Iraqis have had a substantial impact. The affluent minority have caused real estate prices to skyrocket and contributed to growth of over 5%, but collectively the Iraqis have been a drain on an economy that has strained to provide them with basic services like clean drinking water, sanitation, medical care and education. Public schools in Syria are stretched to the limit, and so are government resources. Difficulties in obtaining proper school documentation from Iraq has caused many Iraqi students to drop-out of school in Syria, resorting to odd jobs on the streets. Despite that, the Syrians have promised to try and accommodate 100,000 Iraqi children at state-run schools, in addition to the 40,000 Iraqi college students enrolled at Syrian universities.
The rising number of Iraqi prostitutes has led the government to make it difficult for Iraqi women aged 15-40 to enter Syria unless accompanied by a male relative. According to Hana Ibrahim, the founder of Women's Will (an Iraqi NGO), 50,000 Iraqi women have turned to the sex business around the Arab world due to the unbearable conditions of their lives as refugees. Crime—which is very low in Syria—has also risen in recent years in the wild and uncontrolled neighbourhoods of the Iraqis, nicknamed Little Falluja.
Iraqi refugees are costing the Syrian state no less than $1 billion USD per year. To date, the only state-sponsored assistance received by Syria has come from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation: $1 million USD. Although the US has pledged $153 million to all of Jordan, Syria and Lebanon to help deal with their refugee problem, nothing of that amount has been delivered to Damascus. UNHCR has provided aid of $10 million for health and education—from its 2007 budget of $123 million.
The bulk of the burden has been, and continues to be, shouldered by the Syrian government and tax-payers. Although, the US has given $700 million since 2003 "to help Jordan offset the economic dislocation it faces due to the conflict in Iraq," no comparable payments have been made to Syria. Other Western governments, which also bear responsibility for the chaos in Iraq, such as Australia, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Denmark, Japan and Great Britain, have also been unwilling to help Syria support its Iraqi refugees adequately.
The world must not forget that during the Israel-Hizbullah war last summer, Syria received hundreds of thousands of Lebanese refugees. It is also permanent home to 700,000 Palestinians from a much earlier conflict.
All of this explains why Syria announced that it would be placing strict restrictions on refugees coming from Iraq as of September 2007. The announcement, which had a high tone of regret, said that Syria "can no longer take in any more." Visas would only be given to those coming for educational, business or scientific reasons. Shortly after this went into effect, the al-Tanf border crossing was described as "virtually empty." International organisations, media and states called on Syria to reconsider, making claims that its restrictions would "prevent refugees from fleeing the violence in their country." This scared Iraqis and raised alarm in the international community, prompting the US to announce on September 21 that as of mid-October it would start receiving 1,000 Iraqis per month. By late September 2007, the US would have received 1,700 refugees—a measly number when compared to that of Syria's. Paul Rozenzweig, the Counsellor of the Department of Homeland Security, added, "Next year we're going to resettle 12,000 Iraqis out of a projected total of 70,000 worldwide." For their part, the Syrians changed course briefly by easing restrictions for 'humanitarian reasons' during the holy month of Ramadan (which began on September 13), claiming that this will last only until mid-October, when the fasting period ends.
If Syria were to push further with its measures, or close its borders to Iraqi refugees immigrants, however reluctantly, it would create far more serious problems for all in the region and, ultimately, for the West.
Irrespective of why or how the Iraqi war is being fought, Syria and the US share humanitarian interest in easing the plight of the refugees. On this, both countries certainly should be able to agree.
###
* Sami Moubayed, PhD is a Syrian political analyst and author of "Steel & Silk: Men and Women Who Shaped Syria 1900-2000" (Cune Press, 2005). He teaches at the Faculty of International Relations at al-Kalamoun University in Syria. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service, 04 October 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
Breaking barriers in Brooklyn
Marcia Kannry and Khader El-Yateem with Stephanie Golden
BROOKLYN – We write this article on September 11, 2007—an anniversary with particular meaning for us. We are Father Khader El-Yateem and Marcia Kannry, board members of the Dialogue Project, an organisation that works with multi-ethnic and religiously diverse communities in the New York City area. In particular, we bring dialogue to communities where new Arab and Muslim immigrants live and work alongside long-term residents of various ethnicities. We use dialogue to help people learn to value diverse faiths and cultures, and address intergroup conflict.
For both of us—Marcia, a Jewish-Israeli American, and Father Khader, a Palestinian-Christian American—this article represents victory, for we did not allow the events of 9/11 and the continuing conflict in Palestine and Israel to divide us. Instead, we have used the safe environment of facilitated dialogue to address issues that cause agony and suffering, and to share stories that make us laugh. This willingness to tackle our differences in a positive, fruitful way brings us hope.
Marcia founded the Dialogue Project in spring 2001, aware of rising tensions between Jews and many Arabs and Muslims in Brooklyn. She organised an encounter program at a local synagogue, and over 200 community members attended, 85 of whom signed up for the first dialogue circle that May.
Meanwhile, Khader, pastor of Salam Arabic Lutheran church, was developing relationships with local Muslim and Jewish leaders in Bay Ridge—a neighbourhood with many Arab and Muslim immigrants. He helped create a task force that organised bridge-building events. We met at one of them, and Father Khader has since joined the Dialogue Project board.
The Dialogue Project now conducts six dialogue circles focused on the Middle East, plus Speaking Across Differences, a program that uses dialogue to break through barriers of suspicion in neighbourhoods where new Arab and Muslim populations mix with more established Italian, Anglo, Irish, Jewish, Norwegian, African American, Asian and Latino communities.
Our dialogue model emphasizes active, generous and reflective listening to create an environment where people feel free to express their ideas without fear of being judged. Most importantly, we do not invest in, nor expect a specific end result. This means that people who remain far apart politically can still develop warm relationships and trust, precisely because they are not pushed to come to a consensus. Groups ranging from 5 to 20 people meet once a month. Participants are asked to speak from the "I" and avoid claiming that their views represent their entire community. We attempt to really hear and understand the "other", whether we agree or not, and to speak honestly about hot issues, like the Palestinian right of return, Zionism and security concerns.
In these dialogues, Arabs and Muslims learn that they're not the only community that has been excluded or profiled in this country. Some participants discover that their next-door neighbour feels threatened because they wear a hijab, or pray at a mosque; others discover that their white skin has conferred them privileges of which they were previously unaware.
Father Khader was raised in Beit Jala, Palestine, and has found it difficult to speak of his life experiences there to people in the US. He thinks that people often view Israel's actions as justified and take its assertions at face value, while Palestinians must defend their statements. Friends back home in Palestine become upset when told that he meets with Jews and Israelis in New York. Yet despite such challenges, he values the opportunity to share his personal story of being arrested and tortured in Israeli prisons, and to see others in the circle taking in and understanding his feelings.
Marcia has also been changed through this kind of dialogue. She's a former regional director for the Jewish National Fund, but now relates differently to people in her Jewish community about Palestinians and their homeland, Palestine. She better understands the deep fear of both anti-Jewish and anti-Arab attitudes, and instead of arguing with others about the occupied territories, she tries to share what she has learned in dialogue about the reality of people's lives there.
In these ways, we, and other Dialogue Project participants, have seen how regular and sustained dialogue can produce transformation, not just within the circle but beyond—out into the world—as we bring our changed attitudes and insight into our respective communities. People who barely coexisted now move past fear and mistrust—some have created community projects, including interfaith teach-ins and educational forums on immigration.
We see our model as a path toward more joint ventures, perhaps eventually toward adult education programs and advocacy. And we hope to expand our dialogues to include a broader, conservative cross section of Jews and Palestinians—achieving deeper, richer conversations.
The ability to really listen, without making an automatic retort, requires practice. Once that skill is developed, dialogue shows us how to sit together with our differences, rather than storming out of the room. Often we are asked, "How can my one voice make any difference?" We answer, "Yours may be the voice that brings understanding to the other side."
###
* Marcia Kannry, president of the Dialogue Project board, is a Jewish American whose experience with Christian-Jewish dialogue in the United States and Palestinian-Israeli dialogue in Israel led her to found the Dialogue Project. Father Khader El Yateem, board member and treasurer of the Dialogue Project, is pastor of the Salam Arabic Lutheran Church in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service, 04 October 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for republication.
Author: Sami Moubayed
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 04 October 2007
Word Count: 909
Title: Breaking barriers in Brooklyn
Author: Marcia Kannry and Khader El-Yateem with Stephanie Golden
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 04 October 2007
Word Count: 826
Common Ground News Service
**********
Iraqi refugees on the road to Damascus
Sami Moubayed
DAMASCUS – For the most part of nearly three decades, interaction between Syrians and Iraqis was minimal, to say the least—restricted to political fugitives from each country residing in Baghdad and Damascus. Anyone who is someone in Iraq today was a resident of the Syrian capital—Nuri al-Maliki, Jalal Talabani, Masoud al-Barzani, and Ibrahim al-Jaafari. But neither country had an embassy in the other's capital, there were no formal visits, no cultural exchanges, and no linking telephone lines. Syrians wanting a travel permit would get the words "All Arab countries except Iraq" stamped on their passports. The same was done by authorities in Baghdad. Restrictions were briefly lifted in the late 1970s when the two countries teamed up to oppose Egyptian President Anwar al-Sadat's peace deal with Israel, and Iraqis poured into Syria for tourism, education and business.
Today, there are nearly 1.5 million Iraqis in Syria, but contrary to the case three decades ago, they are mostly refugees. They began arriving after the American invasion of March 2003 and are currently entering at a rate of 2000 per day. They now account for about 11% of Syria's 18 million residents. Syria—living up to its Arab nationalist history and convictions—is the only Arab country to allow Iraqis to come freely, obtain temporary residency permits, and own property on its territory.
Within Syria, the Iraqis have had a substantial impact. The affluent minority have caused real estate prices to skyrocket and contributed to growth of over 5%, but collectively the Iraqis have been a drain on an economy that has strained to provide them with basic services like clean drinking water, sanitation, medical care and education. Public schools in Syria are stretched to the limit, and so are government resources. Difficulties in obtaining proper school documentation from Iraq has caused many Iraqi students to drop-out of school in Syria, resorting to odd jobs on the streets. Despite that, the Syrians have promised to try and accommodate 100,000 Iraqi children at state-run schools, in addition to the 40,000 Iraqi college students enrolled at Syrian universities.
The rising number of Iraqi prostitutes has led the government to make it difficult for Iraqi women aged 15-40 to enter Syria unless accompanied by a male relative. According to Hana Ibrahim, the founder of Women's Will (an Iraqi NGO), 50,000 Iraqi women have turned to the sex business around the Arab world due to the unbearable conditions of their lives as refugees. Crime—which is very low in Syria—has also risen in recent years in the wild and uncontrolled neighbourhoods of the Iraqis, nicknamed Little Falluja.
Iraqi refugees are costing the Syrian state no less than $1 billion USD per year. To date, the only state-sponsored assistance received by Syria has come from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation: $1 million USD. Although the US has pledged $153 million to all of Jordan, Syria and Lebanon to help deal with their refugee problem, nothing of that amount has been delivered to Damascus. UNHCR has provided aid of $10 million for health and education—from its 2007 budget of $123 million.
The bulk of the burden has been, and continues to be, shouldered by the Syrian government and tax-payers. Although, the US has given $700 million since 2003 "to help Jordan offset the economic dislocation it faces due to the conflict in Iraq," no comparable payments have been made to Syria. Other Western governments, which also bear responsibility for the chaos in Iraq, such as Australia, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Denmark, Japan and Great Britain, have also been unwilling to help Syria support its Iraqi refugees adequately.
The world must not forget that during the Israel-Hizbullah war last summer, Syria received hundreds of thousands of Lebanese refugees. It is also permanent home to 700,000 Palestinians from a much earlier conflict.
All of this explains why Syria announced that it would be placing strict restrictions on refugees coming from Iraq as of September 2007. The announcement, which had a high tone of regret, said that Syria "can no longer take in any more." Visas would only be given to those coming for educational, business or scientific reasons. Shortly after this went into effect, the al-Tanf border crossing was described as "virtually empty." International organisations, media and states called on Syria to reconsider, making claims that its restrictions would "prevent refugees from fleeing the violence in their country." This scared Iraqis and raised alarm in the international community, prompting the US to announce on September 21 that as of mid-October it would start receiving 1,000 Iraqis per month. By late September 2007, the US would have received 1,700 refugees—a measly number when compared to that of Syria's. Paul Rozenzweig, the Counsellor of the Department of Homeland Security, added, "Next year we're going to resettle 12,000 Iraqis out of a projected total of 70,000 worldwide." For their part, the Syrians changed course briefly by easing restrictions for 'humanitarian reasons' during the holy month of Ramadan (which began on September 13), claiming that this will last only until mid-October, when the fasting period ends.
If Syria were to push further with its measures, or close its borders to Iraqi refugees immigrants, however reluctantly, it would create far more serious problems for all in the region and, ultimately, for the West.
Irrespective of why or how the Iraqi war is being fought, Syria and the US share humanitarian interest in easing the plight of the refugees. On this, both countries certainly should be able to agree.
###
* Sami Moubayed, PhD is a Syrian political analyst and author of "Steel & Silk: Men and Women Who Shaped Syria 1900-2000" (Cune Press, 2005). He teaches at the Faculty of International Relations at al-Kalamoun University in Syria. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service, 04 October 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
Breaking barriers in Brooklyn
Marcia Kannry and Khader El-Yateem with Stephanie Golden
BROOKLYN – We write this article on September 11, 2007—an anniversary with particular meaning for us. We are Father Khader El-Yateem and Marcia Kannry, board members of the Dialogue Project, an organisation that works with multi-ethnic and religiously diverse communities in the New York City area. In particular, we bring dialogue to communities where new Arab and Muslim immigrants live and work alongside long-term residents of various ethnicities. We use dialogue to help people learn to value diverse faiths and cultures, and address intergroup conflict.
For both of us—Marcia, a Jewish-Israeli American, and Father Khader, a Palestinian-Christian American—this article represents victory, for we did not allow the events of 9/11 and the continuing conflict in Palestine and Israel to divide us. Instead, we have used the safe environment of facilitated dialogue to address issues that cause agony and suffering, and to share stories that make us laugh. This willingness to tackle our differences in a positive, fruitful way brings us hope.
Marcia founded the Dialogue Project in spring 2001, aware of rising tensions between Jews and many Arabs and Muslims in Brooklyn. She organised an encounter program at a local synagogue, and over 200 community members attended, 85 of whom signed up for the first dialogue circle that May.
Meanwhile, Khader, pastor of Salam Arabic Lutheran church, was developing relationships with local Muslim and Jewish leaders in Bay Ridge—a neighbourhood with many Arab and Muslim immigrants. He helped create a task force that organised bridge-building events. We met at one of them, and Father Khader has since joined the Dialogue Project board.
The Dialogue Project now conducts six dialogue circles focused on the Middle East, plus Speaking Across Differences, a program that uses dialogue to break through barriers of suspicion in neighbourhoods where new Arab and Muslim populations mix with more established Italian, Anglo, Irish, Jewish, Norwegian, African American, Asian and Latino communities.
Our dialogue model emphasizes active, generous and reflective listening to create an environment where people feel free to express their ideas without fear of being judged. Most importantly, we do not invest in, nor expect a specific end result. This means that people who remain far apart politically can still develop warm relationships and trust, precisely because they are not pushed to come to a consensus. Groups ranging from 5 to 20 people meet once a month. Participants are asked to speak from the "I" and avoid claiming that their views represent their entire community. We attempt to really hear and understand the "other", whether we agree or not, and to speak honestly about hot issues, like the Palestinian right of return, Zionism and security concerns.
In these dialogues, Arabs and Muslims learn that they're not the only community that has been excluded or profiled in this country. Some participants discover that their next-door neighbour feels threatened because they wear a hijab, or pray at a mosque; others discover that their white skin has conferred them privileges of which they were previously unaware.
Father Khader was raised in Beit Jala, Palestine, and has found it difficult to speak of his life experiences there to people in the US. He thinks that people often view Israel's actions as justified and take its assertions at face value, while Palestinians must defend their statements. Friends back home in Palestine become upset when told that he meets with Jews and Israelis in New York. Yet despite such challenges, he values the opportunity to share his personal story of being arrested and tortured in Israeli prisons, and to see others in the circle taking in and understanding his feelings.
Marcia has also been changed through this kind of dialogue. She's a former regional director for the Jewish National Fund, but now relates differently to people in her Jewish community about Palestinians and their homeland, Palestine. She better understands the deep fear of both anti-Jewish and anti-Arab attitudes, and instead of arguing with others about the occupied territories, she tries to share what she has learned in dialogue about the reality of people's lives there.
In these ways, we, and other Dialogue Project participants, have seen how regular and sustained dialogue can produce transformation, not just within the circle but beyond—out into the world—as we bring our changed attitudes and insight into our respective communities. People who barely coexisted now move past fear and mistrust—some have created community projects, including interfaith teach-ins and educational forums on immigration.
We see our model as a path toward more joint ventures, perhaps eventually toward adult education programs and advocacy. And we hope to expand our dialogues to include a broader, conservative cross section of Jews and Palestinians—achieving deeper, richer conversations.
The ability to really listen, without making an automatic retort, requires practice. Once that skill is developed, dialogue shows us how to sit together with our differences, rather than storming out of the room. Often we are asked, "How can my one voice make any difference?" We answer, "Yours may be the voice that brings understanding to the other side."
###
* Marcia Kannry, president of the Dialogue Project board, is a Jewish American whose experience with Christian-Jewish dialogue in the United States and Palestinian-Israeli dialogue in Israel led her to found the Dialogue Project. Father Khader El Yateem, board member and treasurer of the Dialogue Project, is pastor of the Salam Arabic Lutheran Church in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service, 04 October 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for republication.
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Speech of Palestine President Mahmound Abbas to UN SEP 28, 2007
October 2, 2007
Subject: Speech of President Abbas at the United Nations
From: PLO Mission - Washington, DC
Statement by
H.E. Mr. Mahmoud Abbas
Chairman of the Executive Committee
of the Palestine Liberation Organization
President of the Palestinian National Authority
before the United Nations General Assembly
Sixty-second Session
New York, 28 September 2007
Mr. President
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a pleasure for me, Mr. President, to congratulate you on your election to the presidency of this session. We are very hopeful that your work and efforts will be successful.
I would like also to convey through you our appreciation to H.E. Sheikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa for the tremendous efforts she undertook during her presidency of the General Assembly in the previous session.
On this occasion I would like to express our full confidence in the role of the United Nations and all its specialized agencies, given its historic responsibility towards the question of Palestine until it is resolved in all its aspects, as it, for many decades, has continued to reaffirm the national and inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and to guarantee all kinds of support for our people in the political, economic and humanitarian fields.
We must refer to the exceptional work that has been done and continues to be done by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) in order to preserve the future for generations of Palestine refugees and to ensure them basic services. We must also refer to the efforts exerted by other institutions whether they defend the basic human rights of the Palestinian citizens, or extend support to us in educational and cultural fields and in enhancing the role of the Palestinian National Authority since its inception and contributing to the building of our national institutions.
I would also like to thank H.E. the Secretary-General, Mr. Ban Ki-moon, for placing the question of Palestine at the head of his work priorities and for the high attention he has given to seeking a solution for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and creatively contributing with us to securing the means that would lead to the re-launching of the peace process.
Mr. President,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Confrontations, wars and conflicts in our region and their dangerous and tragic repercussions on the peoples of the regions have become the primary threat to world peace. I call upon the conscience of the entire humanity and the international community to act urgently to radically address these situations without delay. Our experiences over the past years and decades have proven that the policy of delaying the settlement of the major conflicts in our region or partially addressing them just to contain them or to reduce the dangers of these conflicts or to manage them have only led to further complication of the situations and the threat of civil and regional wars and helping terrorism to grow in an environment conducive to it and to spread to regrettably become a global phenomenon.
However, this grim picture should not conceal from our eyes the reality that hope is still alive and that the will of the overwhelming majority of our peoples, supported by the international community, are capable of overcoming the tragic destiny which the forces of occupation, extremism and aggression and war and terrorism in our region want to force us into.
Indeed, there are vital and responsible forces in the Middle East which represent the conscience of their peoples and have a deep desire to move towards liberation, progress and democracy. Though these forces work and struggle in extreme difficulties, they are committed and have the strong will to overcome the current situations and to create a new future for the Middle East in which all of its peoples will enjoy freedom and equality.
There could be no doubt that defending Islam, this religion of moderation, love and human brotherhood, is the responsibility of these vital forces in our region to counter the attempts to defame this monotheistic religion or to portray it in an unfair and distorted manner contrary to its spirit and tenets. Islam is a religion of tolerance against terrorism, killing and assassination. It is a religion of enlightenment against ignorance, darkness and backwardness. It is the religion of openness to the world against closeness and extremism. We all must work together to preserve the mutual human values which we all realize are subject today to violation, aggression and defamation. We must seek broaden human understanding between different religions, cultures and civilizations, because the attempt to spread the spirit of animosity between them is one of the most dangerous means used by international terrorism in the present time. That is why the dialogue among cultures, religions and civilizations is necessary today, particularly since all wars, especially the world wars, were not wars between religions and cultures but rather wars of interests.
That reality constitutes only one fragment of the overall picture. Missing opportunities one after another to seriously address the issues of the peoples in the region and to reach fundamental and comprehensive solutions to them, with the question of Palestine at the forefront, will push our peoples towards the precipice of despair and frustration and make them easy prey to the forces of ignorance and extremism.
Is it not time for the international community to seize this opportunity which we have today to move towards re-launching the peace process? And to transform the idea of the international meeting, which has gained, not only the overwhelming support of the Palestinian and Israeli societies but also of the world at large, into a new beginning for negotiations that would lead to an end to the Israeli occupation of our Palestinian territory and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 and to the achievement of the vision of two States?
Is it not time to establish the independent Palestinian State with Al-Quds Al-Sharif as its capital and to find a just and agreed upon solution to the plight of Palestinian refugees in accordance with General Assembly resolution 194 in order to put an end to their anguish and suffering that had lasted for six decades?
Is it not time to put an end to the policies of colonial expansionism, the seizure of Palestinian lands under different pretexts, the building of the racist separation wall, the imposition of siege, the erection of checkpoints around cities, villages and refugee camps, the continued policies of collective punishment, and the imprisonment of more than 11,300 Palestinians in Israeli jails, some of them imprisoned for more than quarter of a century?
Is it not time for the city of Jerusalem to become a city of true peace for all peoples of faith from all religions, and for Israel, the occupying Power, to cease all actions aimed at altering the character of the sacred city, imposing siege on it and forcing its inhabitants to leave, and desecrating the Christian and Islamic holy places in the city?
Is it not time for Israel to cease its acts of killing, assassinations, dispersion and the destruction of homes and confiscation of lands and homes which are occurring daily?
Is it not time for our people to enjoy freedom and independence in equality with all other peoples and to build their peaceful future side by side with their neighbors, including Israel?
I hope I will not return to this podium next year asking the same questions as there is no obstacle to provide all means of success for the forthcoming peace meeting, particularly since the brotherly Arab countries have shown their true readiness, through the Arab Peace Initiative, to achieving a just, lasting and comprehensive peace, which will be beneficial and fruitful to all parties in the region through the development of normal and comprehensive relations when the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian Territory and the other occupied Arab territories has ended and the sovereign and independent Palestine State is established based on the 1967 borders.
It is in this spirit that we look forward to the substance of the proposed meeting and to an invitation for all concerned parties to attend.
Let me frankly state that there is no politician or responsible leader concerned with his people's interests who does not know well the solution between us and our Israeli neighbors that can be achieved and can last. This solution is embodied in the many resolutions adopted throughout the successive sessions of the General Assembly, the initiative of President Bush for the two-State solution - Palestine side by side with Israel, the Road Map which was endorsed in Security Council resolution 1515, the Arab Peace Initiative, and the outcome of negotiations and plans presented by many parties from 2000 and until now.
Hence, from this podium, I address the Israeli Government, with whose Prime Minister Mr. Olmert I had important and in-depth discussion and dialogue, so that we may end the spiraling of lost opportunities and to make the opportunity of the international conference real and substantive. We should go together to this conference holding in our hands clear, detailed and realistic bases to solve all the final status issues, especially Jerusalem, borders, refugees, water and security and other key issues.
From this podium, I wish to reiterate our people's full readiness to be involved in a true peace process that would lead to a comprehensive and complete agreement on all final status issues. We will present this agreement, as we promised, for a popular referendum to all of the Palestinian people - all segments and wherever they may be - so they can give their views and decision on what has been reached. Thus we can fully and strategically preserve the peace.
I would also like to affirm that we will continue to address, in accordance with our basic law and other laws, the coup d'etat that took place in the Gaza Strip, in order to preserve democracy in our country from the ventures of any group which wants to impose by force its control or its own dark ideas and through armed rebellion. Anyone who thinks that our people, who presented throughout decades the martyrs, the wounded and the prisoners for the sake of freedom and independence and the building of a free, progressive and democratic state, would follow those who want to impose by armed force upon them a closed and backward regime and society, is extremely wrong.
Some have attempted in the past to transform the question of Palestine into a card to be used to serve regional interests or to realize expansionist goals or to promote specific ideas and ideologies, disregarding the true interests of the Palestinian people.
But, we are the ones who struggled and devoted all of our lives for the independence of our national decision, for the protection of the interests and rights of our people, and the rejection of occupation and control from any side. We will not allow for the tragedy to happen one more time or for any attempt to manipulate our national destiny to achieve its goals.
Mr. President,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I came to this podium to convey the message of a tired people burdened with the wounds of occupation, dispersion, imprisonment and martyrdom. Yet they are also a people imbued with the spirit of human dignity and the faith that their future will be made by their own hands even though their past was determined by those who conspired against them and their rights.
I came to reiterate the words of our eternal leader Yasser Arafat, confident that the olive branch - the branch of peace - which does not fade or die, will not fall from my hand.
I came to convey the pain and suffering of every Palestinian man and woman, every one that lost a martyr or injured, everyone that awaits the freedom of a brother, father, sister or mother in prisons, and those stranded on the Iraqi-Syrian borders and the millions of Palestinians living in their homeland or in refugee camps, affirming that the message of peace delivered by the prophets and bearers of the Divine messages from our land will grow and flourish and that the voice of peace in our country will be louder than any other voice.
For all this, let us move forward hand in hand on the shining path of peace, without narrow agendas or temporary, short-term interests. In conclusion, allow me to address our Palestinian people in the homeland and in the diaspora to tell them that there is an important opportunity on the horizon. Let us together unit to make this a reality so that our people can regain their national, legitimate rights and achieve the peace, prosperity and stability for which we have so long aspired and which our steadfast and patient people so deserve.
We also must work so that peace will come to the peoples who suffer and bleed daily like the brotherly Iraqi people and to the peoples who deserve a secure and stable life within the framework of democracy such as the dear people of Lebanon.
Let us build a stable and cooperative world based on respect for life and the right of peoples to self-determination. I thank you, Mr. President, and I thank all of members of this international organization for their support and positions.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Contact Information
phone: (202) 974-6360
Fax: (202) 974-6278
Email: plomission1@aol.com
Website: http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=x9rcefcab.0.7hysjecab.5aedgecab.4303&ts=S0286&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.plomission.us%2F
Subject: Speech of President Abbas at the United Nations
From: PLO Mission - Washington, DC
Statement by
H.E. Mr. Mahmoud Abbas
Chairman of the Executive Committee
of the Palestine Liberation Organization
President of the Palestinian National Authority
before the United Nations General Assembly
Sixty-second Session
New York, 28 September 2007
Mr. President
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a pleasure for me, Mr. President, to congratulate you on your election to the presidency of this session. We are very hopeful that your work and efforts will be successful.
I would like also to convey through you our appreciation to H.E. Sheikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa for the tremendous efforts she undertook during her presidency of the General Assembly in the previous session.
On this occasion I would like to express our full confidence in the role of the United Nations and all its specialized agencies, given its historic responsibility towards the question of Palestine until it is resolved in all its aspects, as it, for many decades, has continued to reaffirm the national and inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and to guarantee all kinds of support for our people in the political, economic and humanitarian fields.
We must refer to the exceptional work that has been done and continues to be done by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) in order to preserve the future for generations of Palestine refugees and to ensure them basic services. We must also refer to the efforts exerted by other institutions whether they defend the basic human rights of the Palestinian citizens, or extend support to us in educational and cultural fields and in enhancing the role of the Palestinian National Authority since its inception and contributing to the building of our national institutions.
I would also like to thank H.E. the Secretary-General, Mr. Ban Ki-moon, for placing the question of Palestine at the head of his work priorities and for the high attention he has given to seeking a solution for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and creatively contributing with us to securing the means that would lead to the re-launching of the peace process.
Mr. President,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Confrontations, wars and conflicts in our region and their dangerous and tragic repercussions on the peoples of the regions have become the primary threat to world peace. I call upon the conscience of the entire humanity and the international community to act urgently to radically address these situations without delay. Our experiences over the past years and decades have proven that the policy of delaying the settlement of the major conflicts in our region or partially addressing them just to contain them or to reduce the dangers of these conflicts or to manage them have only led to further complication of the situations and the threat of civil and regional wars and helping terrorism to grow in an environment conducive to it and to spread to regrettably become a global phenomenon.
However, this grim picture should not conceal from our eyes the reality that hope is still alive and that the will of the overwhelming majority of our peoples, supported by the international community, are capable of overcoming the tragic destiny which the forces of occupation, extremism and aggression and war and terrorism in our region want to force us into.
Indeed, there are vital and responsible forces in the Middle East which represent the conscience of their peoples and have a deep desire to move towards liberation, progress and democracy. Though these forces work and struggle in extreme difficulties, they are committed and have the strong will to overcome the current situations and to create a new future for the Middle East in which all of its peoples will enjoy freedom and equality.
There could be no doubt that defending Islam, this religion of moderation, love and human brotherhood, is the responsibility of these vital forces in our region to counter the attempts to defame this monotheistic religion or to portray it in an unfair and distorted manner contrary to its spirit and tenets. Islam is a religion of tolerance against terrorism, killing and assassination. It is a religion of enlightenment against ignorance, darkness and backwardness. It is the religion of openness to the world against closeness and extremism. We all must work together to preserve the mutual human values which we all realize are subject today to violation, aggression and defamation. We must seek broaden human understanding between different religions, cultures and civilizations, because the attempt to spread the spirit of animosity between them is one of the most dangerous means used by international terrorism in the present time. That is why the dialogue among cultures, religions and civilizations is necessary today, particularly since all wars, especially the world wars, were not wars between religions and cultures but rather wars of interests.
That reality constitutes only one fragment of the overall picture. Missing opportunities one after another to seriously address the issues of the peoples in the region and to reach fundamental and comprehensive solutions to them, with the question of Palestine at the forefront, will push our peoples towards the precipice of despair and frustration and make them easy prey to the forces of ignorance and extremism.
Is it not time for the international community to seize this opportunity which we have today to move towards re-launching the peace process? And to transform the idea of the international meeting, which has gained, not only the overwhelming support of the Palestinian and Israeli societies but also of the world at large, into a new beginning for negotiations that would lead to an end to the Israeli occupation of our Palestinian territory and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 and to the achievement of the vision of two States?
Is it not time to establish the independent Palestinian State with Al-Quds Al-Sharif as its capital and to find a just and agreed upon solution to the plight of Palestinian refugees in accordance with General Assembly resolution 194 in order to put an end to their anguish and suffering that had lasted for six decades?
Is it not time to put an end to the policies of colonial expansionism, the seizure of Palestinian lands under different pretexts, the building of the racist separation wall, the imposition of siege, the erection of checkpoints around cities, villages and refugee camps, the continued policies of collective punishment, and the imprisonment of more than 11,300 Palestinians in Israeli jails, some of them imprisoned for more than quarter of a century?
Is it not time for the city of Jerusalem to become a city of true peace for all peoples of faith from all religions, and for Israel, the occupying Power, to cease all actions aimed at altering the character of the sacred city, imposing siege on it and forcing its inhabitants to leave, and desecrating the Christian and Islamic holy places in the city?
Is it not time for Israel to cease its acts of killing, assassinations, dispersion and the destruction of homes and confiscation of lands and homes which are occurring daily?
Is it not time for our people to enjoy freedom and independence in equality with all other peoples and to build their peaceful future side by side with their neighbors, including Israel?
I hope I will not return to this podium next year asking the same questions as there is no obstacle to provide all means of success for the forthcoming peace meeting, particularly since the brotherly Arab countries have shown their true readiness, through the Arab Peace Initiative, to achieving a just, lasting and comprehensive peace, which will be beneficial and fruitful to all parties in the region through the development of normal and comprehensive relations when the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian Territory and the other occupied Arab territories has ended and the sovereign and independent Palestine State is established based on the 1967 borders.
It is in this spirit that we look forward to the substance of the proposed meeting and to an invitation for all concerned parties to attend.
Let me frankly state that there is no politician or responsible leader concerned with his people's interests who does not know well the solution between us and our Israeli neighbors that can be achieved and can last. This solution is embodied in the many resolutions adopted throughout the successive sessions of the General Assembly, the initiative of President Bush for the two-State solution - Palestine side by side with Israel, the Road Map which was endorsed in Security Council resolution 1515, the Arab Peace Initiative, and the outcome of negotiations and plans presented by many parties from 2000 and until now.
Hence, from this podium, I address the Israeli Government, with whose Prime Minister Mr. Olmert I had important and in-depth discussion and dialogue, so that we may end the spiraling of lost opportunities and to make the opportunity of the international conference real and substantive. We should go together to this conference holding in our hands clear, detailed and realistic bases to solve all the final status issues, especially Jerusalem, borders, refugees, water and security and other key issues.
From this podium, I wish to reiterate our people's full readiness to be involved in a true peace process that would lead to a comprehensive and complete agreement on all final status issues. We will present this agreement, as we promised, for a popular referendum to all of the Palestinian people - all segments and wherever they may be - so they can give their views and decision on what has been reached. Thus we can fully and strategically preserve the peace.
I would also like to affirm that we will continue to address, in accordance with our basic law and other laws, the coup d'etat that took place in the Gaza Strip, in order to preserve democracy in our country from the ventures of any group which wants to impose by force its control or its own dark ideas and through armed rebellion. Anyone who thinks that our people, who presented throughout decades the martyrs, the wounded and the prisoners for the sake of freedom and independence and the building of a free, progressive and democratic state, would follow those who want to impose by armed force upon them a closed and backward regime and society, is extremely wrong.
Some have attempted in the past to transform the question of Palestine into a card to be used to serve regional interests or to realize expansionist goals or to promote specific ideas and ideologies, disregarding the true interests of the Palestinian people.
But, we are the ones who struggled and devoted all of our lives for the independence of our national decision, for the protection of the interests and rights of our people, and the rejection of occupation and control from any side. We will not allow for the tragedy to happen one more time or for any attempt to manipulate our national destiny to achieve its goals.
Mr. President,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I came to this podium to convey the message of a tired people burdened with the wounds of occupation, dispersion, imprisonment and martyrdom. Yet they are also a people imbued with the spirit of human dignity and the faith that their future will be made by their own hands even though their past was determined by those who conspired against them and their rights.
I came to reiterate the words of our eternal leader Yasser Arafat, confident that the olive branch - the branch of peace - which does not fade or die, will not fall from my hand.
I came to convey the pain and suffering of every Palestinian man and woman, every one that lost a martyr or injured, everyone that awaits the freedom of a brother, father, sister or mother in prisons, and those stranded on the Iraqi-Syrian borders and the millions of Palestinians living in their homeland or in refugee camps, affirming that the message of peace delivered by the prophets and bearers of the Divine messages from our land will grow and flourish and that the voice of peace in our country will be louder than any other voice.
For all this, let us move forward hand in hand on the shining path of peace, without narrow agendas or temporary, short-term interests. In conclusion, allow me to address our Palestinian people in the homeland and in the diaspora to tell them that there is an important opportunity on the horizon. Let us together unit to make this a reality so that our people can regain their national, legitimate rights and achieve the peace, prosperity and stability for which we have so long aspired and which our steadfast and patient people so deserve.
We also must work so that peace will come to the peoples who suffer and bleed daily like the brotherly Iraqi people and to the peoples who deserve a secure and stable life within the framework of democracy such as the dear people of Lebanon.
Let us build a stable and cooperative world based on respect for life and the right of peoples to self-determination. I thank you, Mr. President, and I thank all of members of this international organization for their support and positions.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Contact Information
phone: (202) 974-6360
Fax: (202) 974-6278
Email: plomission1@aol.com
Website: http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=x9rcefcab.0.7hysjecab.5aedgecab.4303&ts=S0286&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.plomission.us%2F
Eliav-Sartawi Awards in Journalism Announced
2007 Middle East Journalism Awards Announced
Search for Common Ground has announced the recipients of this year's annual Eliav-Sartawi Awards for Middle Eastern Journalism.
These Awards are given annually to recognize and encourage journalism that contributes to better understanding between people in the Middle East. The winning articles provide insight into regional issues and debates, contribute to political dialogue, expose readers to new perspectives and help to lay the groundwork for peaceful solutions to Middle Eastern conflict.
The Awards will be presented on the afternoon of November 7th at a special event co-sponsored by Columbia University School of Journalism and School of International Affairs in New York City.
The 2007 recipients are: Akiva Eldar and Salameh Nematt, "Reaching Across the Divide," published simultaneously in Ha'aretz, Al Quds, and The Baltimore SunAkiva Eldar is Chief Political Columnist and an editorial writer at Ha'aretz. The Financial Times named him one of the most influential commentators in the world in 2006. He is the co-author of "Lords of the Land: The War Over Israel's Settlements in the Occupied Territories," recently published by Nation Books. Salameh Nematt is a Jordanian journalist with more than 20 years of experience covering political, security, and human rights issues. He is a frequent guest on TV and radio news and talk shows, and was a political analyst and Washington Bureau Chief for the London-based Al-Hayat newspaper and the LBC Arab satellite channel.
Bassam Aramin, "A Plea for Peace from a Bereaved Palestinian Father," originally published in The Jewish Daily ForwardBassam Aramin is head of the Al Quds Association for Democracy and Dialogue, and is one of the co-founders of Combatants for Peace, a group consisting of former Israeli soldiers and Palestinian fighters now working together to achieve a nonviolent end to the conflict.
Gershon Baskin, "When Will It All End," originally published in the Jerusalem Post Gershon Baskin is the Israeli Co-Director and Founder of the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information (IPCRI), a joint public policy think tank. Dr. Baskin's books and articles on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have been widely published and he has received numerous awards for his work.
The winning articles can be found on the Common Ground News Service website, here: http://www.commongroundnews.org/awards2007.php?lan=en&sid=0
The Awardees will join international journalists in a symposium on the impact of the media on the conflict in the Middle East.
In speaking about why common ground journalism is relevant and needed in the Middle East, Akiva Eldar said "as a Jew, as a human being, and as a commentator, my job is to protect my children. Peace is too important to leave to the politicians alone: It is everyone's job." Salameh Nematt reflected that "the beginnings of change begin with the media."
The Awards were conceived and are funded by J. Zel Lurie, veteran American journalist, who began reporting on the Middle East during the British Mandate in Palestine before 1948. Mr. Lurie sought to give recognition to journalists whose work promotes greater understanding between Arabs and Israelis.
The Awards are named after two courageous pioneers of the Israeli-Palestinian dialogue. Dr. Issam Sartawi, an advisor to Yassir Arafat, was assassinated in 1983 for his moderate stance. Lova Eliav was active in Israeli politics and diplomacy since the founding of the state. They both received the 1979 Kreisky Prize of Austria for their efforts in exploring a peaceful end to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
For information contact:Rebecca Polivy Search for Common Ground Jerusalem, Israel rpolivy@sfcg.org 972 (0)2-581-2049 Susan Koscis Search for Common Ground Washington DC skoscis@sfcg.org (202) 777-2215 http://www.sfcg.org/
Search for Common Ground has announced the recipients of this year's annual Eliav-Sartawi Awards for Middle Eastern Journalism.
These Awards are given annually to recognize and encourage journalism that contributes to better understanding between people in the Middle East. The winning articles provide insight into regional issues and debates, contribute to political dialogue, expose readers to new perspectives and help to lay the groundwork for peaceful solutions to Middle Eastern conflict.
The Awards will be presented on the afternoon of November 7th at a special event co-sponsored by Columbia University School of Journalism and School of International Affairs in New York City.
The 2007 recipients are: Akiva Eldar and Salameh Nematt, "Reaching Across the Divide," published simultaneously in Ha'aretz, Al Quds, and The Baltimore SunAkiva Eldar is Chief Political Columnist and an editorial writer at Ha'aretz. The Financial Times named him one of the most influential commentators in the world in 2006. He is the co-author of "Lords of the Land: The War Over Israel's Settlements in the Occupied Territories," recently published by Nation Books. Salameh Nematt is a Jordanian journalist with more than 20 years of experience covering political, security, and human rights issues. He is a frequent guest on TV and radio news and talk shows, and was a political analyst and Washington Bureau Chief for the London-based Al-Hayat newspaper and the LBC Arab satellite channel.
Bassam Aramin, "A Plea for Peace from a Bereaved Palestinian Father," originally published in The Jewish Daily ForwardBassam Aramin is head of the Al Quds Association for Democracy and Dialogue, and is one of the co-founders of Combatants for Peace, a group consisting of former Israeli soldiers and Palestinian fighters now working together to achieve a nonviolent end to the conflict.
Gershon Baskin, "When Will It All End," originally published in the Jerusalem Post Gershon Baskin is the Israeli Co-Director and Founder of the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information (IPCRI), a joint public policy think tank. Dr. Baskin's books and articles on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have been widely published and he has received numerous awards for his work.
The winning articles can be found on the Common Ground News Service website, here: http://www.commongroundnews.org/awards2007.php?lan=en&sid=0
The Awardees will join international journalists in a symposium on the impact of the media on the conflict in the Middle East.
In speaking about why common ground journalism is relevant and needed in the Middle East, Akiva Eldar said "as a Jew, as a human being, and as a commentator, my job is to protect my children. Peace is too important to leave to the politicians alone: It is everyone's job." Salameh Nematt reflected that "the beginnings of change begin with the media."
The Awards were conceived and are funded by J. Zel Lurie, veteran American journalist, who began reporting on the Middle East during the British Mandate in Palestine before 1948. Mr. Lurie sought to give recognition to journalists whose work promotes greater understanding between Arabs and Israelis.
The Awards are named after two courageous pioneers of the Israeli-Palestinian dialogue. Dr. Issam Sartawi, an advisor to Yassir Arafat, was assassinated in 1983 for his moderate stance. Lova Eliav was active in Israeli politics and diplomacy since the founding of the state. They both received the 1979 Kreisky Prize of Austria for their efforts in exploring a peaceful end to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
For information contact:Rebecca Polivy Search for Common Ground Jerusalem, Israel rpolivy@sfcg.org 972 (0)2-581-2049 Susan Koscis Search for Common Ground Washington DC skoscis@sfcg.org (202) 777-2215 http://www.sfcg.org/
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Common Ground News Opinion Columns
Title: Message from the Prophet is clear: coexist
Author: Hisham al-Zoubeir
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 844
Title: The importance of meeting face-to-face
Author: Susan Harrison
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 840
Title: Talk "Lebanon" first
Author: Michael Young
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 692
Title: ~Youth Views~ Humanity doesn't change with geography
Author: Pensee Afifi and Jane Slusark
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 691
**********
Message from the Prophet is clear: coexist
Hisham al-Zoubeir
Washington, DC РAs the world watches the terrible eruption of violence between Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq and is subjected to sporadic communiqu̩s by vigilantes calling for violence against their opponents both within the Muslim community and without, many who are unfamiliar with Islam and Muslims may be forgiven for thinking the worst of both the religion and its followers. Yet in Islam and Muslim history, the precedent for religious co-existence is primordial.
The Qur'anic view of the carpenter from Nazareth is clear: Jesus is called the Spirit of God, and the Messiah. Moses is described as the prophet to whom God spoke directly, without any veil. Muslims still revere those men, and their followers are accorded special places within the book of Islam.
The Arabian Prophet, Muhammad, sent according to Islamic tradition as a "mercy to all the worlds", showed us how these theological abstractions were exemplified in practice in the first interfaith meeting between Muslims and Christians - held some 14 centuries ago.
A delegation of sixty Christians from a community about 450 miles south of the Prophet's city, Medina, visited him in the year 631. During this three-day meeting between representatives of one faith-community with the founder of another, the model of Muslim ethics vis-Ã -vis the religious "other" was made explicit for all time. There are many lessons to be drawn from this encounter, but three stand out.
The first is that neither the Christians nor the Muslims pretended to be other than what they were. The Christians insisted on Trinitarianism, and the Prophet rejected it as a matter of faith. Both sides believed that Christ was the Messiah, that he had been born without a father, and that he received revelation from God. There was no shying away from difference, but the search for common ground was primary. Remember the culture of the time - the Prophet held the upper hand as the leader of a powerful community - but he did not disrespect his guests, who were politically powerless.
The second was that difference was not a cause of religious conflict. When the Christians suggested they go out into the desert to perform mass, the Prophet invited them to carry out their rituals within his mosque. He did not partake of their rituals, but he invited them into his own place of worship to carry them out. This was not mere tolerance: this was respect, if not acceptance. He met them with what he considered to be absolute truths, but not as a bigot.
Later generations of Muslims took his practice very seriously: when he said that the rights of non-Muslims under the protection of the Islamic polity were sacrosanct, that he would be a witness for them on the Day of Judgement, Muslims listened. The millions of non-Muslims who are still very much a part of the Muslim world are testimony to that. The situation was not perfect, but non-Muslim historians record that it was the best model of its time.
The third lesson was that difference did not mean that co-existence on a social and political level was impossible. The Christians nonetheless accepted the Prophet as their guarantor in the political realm, and for 14 centuries other Christian communities have accepted Muslim rulers as their guarantors, with their lives, property and religion safeguarded in exchange for a tax, similar to the tax Muslims paid to their temporal authorities.
The above encounter with the Christians of Najran was by no means an isolated event in the life of the Prophet which points to ongoing interfaith relations. An earlier treaty, the documentation of which is still in existence, with Christians of Sinai bore this practice out:
"This is a message from Muhammad son of Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far: we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers (people of Medina), and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by God! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate."
None of the above was a medieval call for syncretism, nor should it be understood to be a denial that Islam, a universal religion, did call for Muslims to be fully committed to their faith. Rather, this was placing into Muslim ethics the need to respect the religious other, by respectfully engaging this other.
The Prophet is known to have claimed that he was not sent "except to perfect good manners", and his display of respect and co-existence is a model that has become sorely lacking in many parts of the world. While some may have forgotten his example, his practice nonetheless established precedents that we would do well to heed today with renewed commitment.
###
* Hisham al-Zoubeir is a researcher of classical Islamic thought. He holds a Ph.D. in the history of European Muslims, and writes on Islam-West relations. This article is part of a series on apostasy and proselytism distributed by the Common Ground News Service and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
The importance of meeting face-to-face
Susan Harrison
Toronto - Does it matter if we meet face-to-face?
In 2004 I went to Qom, Iran to participate in a conference called "Revelation and Authority", a dialogue between North American Christian Mennonite scholars and local Muslim Shiite scholars. A few months ago, we met again - this time in Waterloo in Ontario, Canada. It was a joyful, collegial reunion and, in addition, a nonverbal connection seemed to occur when we looked at each other again, face-to-face.
Each time we gather for dialogue, there is a kind of audible relief in realising that we both really exist, that we are dedicated to making this dialogue happen.
Face-to-face meetings are the moment when the research and media-informed opinions we hold are measured against the experience of the encounter with the other. There is something profound about meeting face-to-face: noticing that someone limps or has a hard time staying awake in a long lecture, seeing the way someone's eyes light up when they hear a new idea, or watching the quizzical looks on a Muslim's face when a Mennonite explains the worship of a triune God (a God in 3 forms).
People are like "living books", but unlike a published paperback, our plots are constantly changing. And, as living books, our stories interact with each other when we meet; they take account of the new characters, who in turn affect the plot line and the ensuing chapters.
However, these kinds of meetings are becoming increasingly more difficult to arrange these days because travel visas are regularly denied on both sides. Tense political relations in past months and tighter borders in the wake of 9/11 have resulted in stringent travel restrictions and have made such face-to-face visits more difficult.
The Mennonite Central Committee (MCC), a religion-based non-profit development organisation, first became involved in Iran following the 1990 earthquake. A friendship formed between Ed Martin, the then-director of MCC's Asia desk and the Director General of International Affairs in Iran, Sadreddin Sadr. Working together in disaster relief, they shared a vision to build relationships that would un-demonise Iranians for North Americans and vice versa. A student exchange program was proposed and Toronto, Canada, where a sizeable Mennonite graduate student community could be found, became the venue. The Imam Khomeini Education and Research Institute (IKERI) volunteered to host Christian Mennonite students in Qom.
In addition to the student exchange program, which began in 1998, the MCC developed "learning tours" that brought groups to Iran on itinerated programs. Two tours of 10 days each allowed Mennonites and Muslims to meet and learn about each other first hand.
An example of the power of first hand meetings is captured in the remark of an Iranian Muslim, attending a Canadian school: "meeting face-to-face works as a source of miraculous mutual understanding. I can say that people who are afraid of you, as a Muslim or as an Iranian, after 10 to 30 minutes of conversation begin to recognise you as a human being."
As I write this, I am aware that I had been planning on attending a conference, "One God of Abraham, Different Traditions", at Eastern Mennonite University in September 2007. The participants were Mennonite scholars and a guest delegation from the Islamic Republic of Iran led by Ayatollah Araqi, head of the Organization of Culture and Islamic Relations. The delegation included Iranian religious leaders and scholars, Morris Motamed, a Jewish member of Iran's Parliament and Archbishop Sarkissian of the Armenian Church in Iran.
One week before the guests were due to arrive, 4 out of 15 visas were refused for "security reasons", though the US State Department did not send this message in writing. Since Ayatollah Araqi was among those refused entry, the visit was unfortunately called off.
This is not only a US-specific problem. In May 2007, 15 North American Mennonites were denied entry into Iran for a fully itinerated learning tour. During this same time, the Western media accused the institute of having a direct line to President Ahmadinejad's government, and critics accused the MCC of therefore supporting Ahmadinejad's government by association with IKERI.
The notion that dialogue between people of different faiths poses a security risk to their home countries continues to be the underlying theme of this ongoing problem of blocked encounters. N. Gerald Shenk, a professor at Eastern Mennonite University, wonders "whether the freedom protected by 'security' overrides the freedom to build better understanding across these dangerous divides."
Face-to-face encounters, according to contact theories, will break down stereotypes and build the understanding and trust that is greatly needed between the West and Iran. Yet as Martin remarked when the visas were refused, "It is back to 'square one' to figure out how to develop relationships of understanding, trust and friendship between Iranians and Americans that will prevent war between our countries."
While people can criticise the MCC for engaging with IKERI as Muslim dialogue partners, the fact remains that a constructive relationship has developed between the two communities, and if allowed to grow it could influence the stories of those individuals who are touched by it.
###
* Susan Kennel Harrison is a PhD candidate at the Toronto School of Theology and has been coordinating the Toronto side of the MCC student exchange with Iran since 1998. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
Talk "Lebanon" first
Michael Young
Beirut - For many Lebanese, Syrian involvement in regional peace negotiations is only desirable if its practical outcome is increased respect for Lebanese sovereignty and independence.
However, the Lebanese are not that optimistic. They fear that once negotiations begin between Syria and Israel, the international community will have little mind to support the international court prosecuting those involved in the February 2005 assassination of the former Lebanese Prime Minister, Rafiq Hariri. Syria remains a prime suspect in that crime and has systematically sought to derail efforts to establish the tribunal in Lebanon. And though the UN Security Council approved the tribunal under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, Syria's peace talks with Israel could earn Damascus a reprieve.
Advocates of Syrian-Israeli talks have underlined the importance of a breakthrough, arguing that Syria and Israel are much closer to a settlement than the Palestinians and Israelis, thanks largely to negotiations throughout the 1990's and unofficial agreements reached in recent years. However, these advocates routinely fail to address the possibility that Syria may not be able to afford peace. President Assad's regime may benefit from a negotiating process, but not necessarily from a peace agreement. After all, peace with Israel would oblige the regime to largely dismantle the military and security apparatus used to prop up its authority. Could Assad, who heads a minority regime, accept a peace that would undermine his Arab nationalist credentials domestically and regionally, and also threaten his burgeoning strategic alliance with Iran?
While many maintain that Syria's interest in negotiations with Israel is to reclaim the Golan Heights, its leadership has shown in recent years that its true aim is to preserve control over Lebanon. As the late Yitzhak Rabin once put it, "Better Syrian troops in Lebanon than on the Golan." It was his indirect way of admitting that though Syria was negotiating a return of the Golan, the late Hafez Assad was also keen to ensure that Syria maintained its hold over Lebanon. And in fact, that was exactly what happened. Lebanon's negotiating track with Israel was fully absorbed into the Syrian track, a move approved by the Clinton administration and all of the main Arab and European states.
Lastly, the promoters of a Syrian-Israeli negotiating track have failed to provide options to protect Lebanon from persistent efforts by Damascus to re-impose its hegemony over its smaller neighbour. The Hariri tribunal remains a major obstacle, so that international conflict resolution institutions have offered convoluted solutions that respect the tribunal but also ensure the protection of Syria's leadership. Their casuistry has failed to take into consideration that a thorough and legitimate trial process might very well point the finger at the same Syrian leaders whom the promoters of negotiations want to spare.
Lebanon should not pay the price for a Syrian-Israeli dialogue, nor should Syria be denied an opportunity to talk to Israel in goodwill. That is why the international community should impose certain conditions on regional peace talks, which can test Syrian intentions while also guaranteeing Syria's respect for Lebanese sovereignty and independence.
The first condition for international backing for Syrian-Israeli talks has to be Syria's formal acceptance of all UN resolutions relating to Lebanon, particularly Resolutions 1559 and 1701, which Damascus has repeatedly violated. Syria must specifically agree to end its interference in Lebanon and its arming of Lebanese parties. It must also agree to open an embassy in Beirut, something it has never done on the grounds that Lebanese and Syrians are "one people in two countries", and it must agree on final borders with Lebanon.
Syria must also make a clear statement that it will collaborate with the Hariri tribunal and send any Syrian suspects to Holland, where the court is to be set up, not try them in Syrian courts, as Syrian officials have repeatedly insisted. These conditions are now part of international legislation, since Chapter VII authority obliges all parties to obey the tribunal's requests.
Once these conditions are met, a Syrian-Israeli peace track would be eminently desirable. But there is no reason for Lebanon to be Syria's ticket to a settlement. Until this issue is resolved, Syria and Israel are likely to tiptoe around without going very far.
###
* Michael Young is opinion editor of the Daily Star newspaper in Lebanon. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
~Youth Views~ Humanity doesn't change with geography
Pensee Afifi and Jane Slusark
Cairo/Iowa City, Iowa - The Arab world and the West represent two sides of the same coin. Though we are from different parts of the globe, we are two parts that make up a whole: we live in the same world. In that respect, though we all have our distinct cultures, it is worth remembering — and strengthening — our universal culture.
The most basic roots of global culture are derived from the fact that we, as humans, experience the same basic feelings — pain, love, anger, fear, etc. We all aspire to avoid pain and maximise pleasure. It is the existence of fear that holds us back from forming relationships or trusting another person, especially one we perceive as different from us. Our mutual understanding of how death, life, war and tragedy affect a person should be a platform upon which we can foster respect and friendship. No one wants to lose a son, a mother or a grandfather, so we should all be able to see the insanity of needless violence.
We also understand the personal connection a person has with his or her home or village — it would pain us to see it destroyed. But the shared culture of the world can become clouded through dehumanisation. War is only possible when we perceive the enemy as being less than human. The rhetoric of politics and overzealous leaders allows the mass populous to forget that they have the same heart as the person they "hate" across the border. If you strip away the external factors, what you have left is the same basic individual with the same basic needs.
There are also values, morals and traditions that are respected and appreciated around the globe, such as the role of the family. The form may differ, but the relationship between family members is important in all communities and cultures. In the Arab world, the family represents the past, present and future. It is believed in the Arab world that individuals are not only educated in schools, but also in the home. With that belief, families exert tremendous effort in shaping their children's personalities. Kinship ties also often bring considerable responsibilities; an Arab individual would be considered less of a person without his or her family's ongoing support and guidance.
In the Western world, the independence of individuals plays a larger role in the development of family ties. In that regard, Western families provide education, guidance and support but also teach independence and responsibility to allow individuals to form their own lives outside the family boundaries.
In both cases, the importance of the family is apparent. Although Arab and American students sometimes argue over the level of responsibility and independence expected by the family in their respective cultures, it is easy to realise that though we differ, we still agree that the family plays an important role in education and support.
Countries define their culture by their history. But one may ask, "The history of what?" Most of what is found in schools' textbooks is the history of politics, the history of conflict. Yet, every country has a period they look back on as a darkened era, in which grave mistakes were made, or as "the good old days" when everything was simple and people were happy. Each has had its share of triumphs and trials. It is important to remember the histories, but it is also important not to read too much into them. The grudges of the past should not prevent two nations from respecting each other in the present, or from working together toward a common goal. By focusing on events, we forget the collective feelings, the human aspects that led to the eventual settlement of the conflict.
To achieve true respect and understanding on a global scale, we must interact and focus on our common human characteristics. We are all human beings, and share the same feelings, needs and values. What we forget most of the time is that even though we disagree, we can't separate ourselves from the other side of the coin; we all have something in common. At the very least, we can share in our thirst to understand one another.
###
* Pensee Afifi is a student at the American University in Cairo and Jane Slusark studies at the University of Iowa in Iowa City. They co-wrote this article as part of the Soliya Connect Program's West-Muslim World intercultural dialogue program. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
end
Author: Hisham al-Zoubeir
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 844
Title: The importance of meeting face-to-face
Author: Susan Harrison
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 840
Title: Talk "Lebanon" first
Author: Michael Young
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 692
Title: ~Youth Views~ Humanity doesn't change with geography
Author: Pensee Afifi and Jane Slusark
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 691
**********
Message from the Prophet is clear: coexist
Hisham al-Zoubeir
Washington, DC РAs the world watches the terrible eruption of violence between Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq and is subjected to sporadic communiqu̩s by vigilantes calling for violence against their opponents both within the Muslim community and without, many who are unfamiliar with Islam and Muslims may be forgiven for thinking the worst of both the religion and its followers. Yet in Islam and Muslim history, the precedent for religious co-existence is primordial.
The Qur'anic view of the carpenter from Nazareth is clear: Jesus is called the Spirit of God, and the Messiah. Moses is described as the prophet to whom God spoke directly, without any veil. Muslims still revere those men, and their followers are accorded special places within the book of Islam.
The Arabian Prophet, Muhammad, sent according to Islamic tradition as a "mercy to all the worlds", showed us how these theological abstractions were exemplified in practice in the first interfaith meeting between Muslims and Christians - held some 14 centuries ago.
A delegation of sixty Christians from a community about 450 miles south of the Prophet's city, Medina, visited him in the year 631. During this three-day meeting between representatives of one faith-community with the founder of another, the model of Muslim ethics vis-Ã -vis the religious "other" was made explicit for all time. There are many lessons to be drawn from this encounter, but three stand out.
The first is that neither the Christians nor the Muslims pretended to be other than what they were. The Christians insisted on Trinitarianism, and the Prophet rejected it as a matter of faith. Both sides believed that Christ was the Messiah, that he had been born without a father, and that he received revelation from God. There was no shying away from difference, but the search for common ground was primary. Remember the culture of the time - the Prophet held the upper hand as the leader of a powerful community - but he did not disrespect his guests, who were politically powerless.
The second was that difference was not a cause of religious conflict. When the Christians suggested they go out into the desert to perform mass, the Prophet invited them to carry out their rituals within his mosque. He did not partake of their rituals, but he invited them into his own place of worship to carry them out. This was not mere tolerance: this was respect, if not acceptance. He met them with what he considered to be absolute truths, but not as a bigot.
Later generations of Muslims took his practice very seriously: when he said that the rights of non-Muslims under the protection of the Islamic polity were sacrosanct, that he would be a witness for them on the Day of Judgement, Muslims listened. The millions of non-Muslims who are still very much a part of the Muslim world are testimony to that. The situation was not perfect, but non-Muslim historians record that it was the best model of its time.
The third lesson was that difference did not mean that co-existence on a social and political level was impossible. The Christians nonetheless accepted the Prophet as their guarantor in the political realm, and for 14 centuries other Christian communities have accepted Muslim rulers as their guarantors, with their lives, property and religion safeguarded in exchange for a tax, similar to the tax Muslims paid to their temporal authorities.
The above encounter with the Christians of Najran was by no means an isolated event in the life of the Prophet which points to ongoing interfaith relations. An earlier treaty, the documentation of which is still in existence, with Christians of Sinai bore this practice out:
"This is a message from Muhammad son of Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far: we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers (people of Medina), and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by God! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate."
None of the above was a medieval call for syncretism, nor should it be understood to be a denial that Islam, a universal religion, did call for Muslims to be fully committed to their faith. Rather, this was placing into Muslim ethics the need to respect the religious other, by respectfully engaging this other.
The Prophet is known to have claimed that he was not sent "except to perfect good manners", and his display of respect and co-existence is a model that has become sorely lacking in many parts of the world. While some may have forgotten his example, his practice nonetheless established precedents that we would do well to heed today with renewed commitment.
###
* Hisham al-Zoubeir is a researcher of classical Islamic thought. He holds a Ph.D. in the history of European Muslims, and writes on Islam-West relations. This article is part of a series on apostasy and proselytism distributed by the Common Ground News Service and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
The importance of meeting face-to-face
Susan Harrison
Toronto - Does it matter if we meet face-to-face?
In 2004 I went to Qom, Iran to participate in a conference called "Revelation and Authority", a dialogue between North American Christian Mennonite scholars and local Muslim Shiite scholars. A few months ago, we met again - this time in Waterloo in Ontario, Canada. It was a joyful, collegial reunion and, in addition, a nonverbal connection seemed to occur when we looked at each other again, face-to-face.
Each time we gather for dialogue, there is a kind of audible relief in realising that we both really exist, that we are dedicated to making this dialogue happen.
Face-to-face meetings are the moment when the research and media-informed opinions we hold are measured against the experience of the encounter with the other. There is something profound about meeting face-to-face: noticing that someone limps or has a hard time staying awake in a long lecture, seeing the way someone's eyes light up when they hear a new idea, or watching the quizzical looks on a Muslim's face when a Mennonite explains the worship of a triune God (a God in 3 forms).
People are like "living books", but unlike a published paperback, our plots are constantly changing. And, as living books, our stories interact with each other when we meet; they take account of the new characters, who in turn affect the plot line and the ensuing chapters.
However, these kinds of meetings are becoming increasingly more difficult to arrange these days because travel visas are regularly denied on both sides. Tense political relations in past months and tighter borders in the wake of 9/11 have resulted in stringent travel restrictions and have made such face-to-face visits more difficult.
The Mennonite Central Committee (MCC), a religion-based non-profit development organisation, first became involved in Iran following the 1990 earthquake. A friendship formed between Ed Martin, the then-director of MCC's Asia desk and the Director General of International Affairs in Iran, Sadreddin Sadr. Working together in disaster relief, they shared a vision to build relationships that would un-demonise Iranians for North Americans and vice versa. A student exchange program was proposed and Toronto, Canada, where a sizeable Mennonite graduate student community could be found, became the venue. The Imam Khomeini Education and Research Institute (IKERI) volunteered to host Christian Mennonite students in Qom.
In addition to the student exchange program, which began in 1998, the MCC developed "learning tours" that brought groups to Iran on itinerated programs. Two tours of 10 days each allowed Mennonites and Muslims to meet and learn about each other first hand.
An example of the power of first hand meetings is captured in the remark of an Iranian Muslim, attending a Canadian school: "meeting face-to-face works as a source of miraculous mutual understanding. I can say that people who are afraid of you, as a Muslim or as an Iranian, after 10 to 30 minutes of conversation begin to recognise you as a human being."
As I write this, I am aware that I had been planning on attending a conference, "One God of Abraham, Different Traditions", at Eastern Mennonite University in September 2007. The participants were Mennonite scholars and a guest delegation from the Islamic Republic of Iran led by Ayatollah Araqi, head of the Organization of Culture and Islamic Relations. The delegation included Iranian religious leaders and scholars, Morris Motamed, a Jewish member of Iran's Parliament and Archbishop Sarkissian of the Armenian Church in Iran.
One week before the guests were due to arrive, 4 out of 15 visas were refused for "security reasons", though the US State Department did not send this message in writing. Since Ayatollah Araqi was among those refused entry, the visit was unfortunately called off.
This is not only a US-specific problem. In May 2007, 15 North American Mennonites were denied entry into Iran for a fully itinerated learning tour. During this same time, the Western media accused the institute of having a direct line to President Ahmadinejad's government, and critics accused the MCC of therefore supporting Ahmadinejad's government by association with IKERI.
The notion that dialogue between people of different faiths poses a security risk to their home countries continues to be the underlying theme of this ongoing problem of blocked encounters. N. Gerald Shenk, a professor at Eastern Mennonite University, wonders "whether the freedom protected by 'security' overrides the freedom to build better understanding across these dangerous divides."
Face-to-face encounters, according to contact theories, will break down stereotypes and build the understanding and trust that is greatly needed between the West and Iran. Yet as Martin remarked when the visas were refused, "It is back to 'square one' to figure out how to develop relationships of understanding, trust and friendship between Iranians and Americans that will prevent war between our countries."
While people can criticise the MCC for engaging with IKERI as Muslim dialogue partners, the fact remains that a constructive relationship has developed between the two communities, and if allowed to grow it could influence the stories of those individuals who are touched by it.
###
* Susan Kennel Harrison is a PhD candidate at the Toronto School of Theology and has been coordinating the Toronto side of the MCC student exchange with Iran since 1998. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
Talk "Lebanon" first
Michael Young
Beirut - For many Lebanese, Syrian involvement in regional peace negotiations is only desirable if its practical outcome is increased respect for Lebanese sovereignty and independence.
However, the Lebanese are not that optimistic. They fear that once negotiations begin between Syria and Israel, the international community will have little mind to support the international court prosecuting those involved in the February 2005 assassination of the former Lebanese Prime Minister, Rafiq Hariri. Syria remains a prime suspect in that crime and has systematically sought to derail efforts to establish the tribunal in Lebanon. And though the UN Security Council approved the tribunal under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, Syria's peace talks with Israel could earn Damascus a reprieve.
Advocates of Syrian-Israeli talks have underlined the importance of a breakthrough, arguing that Syria and Israel are much closer to a settlement than the Palestinians and Israelis, thanks largely to negotiations throughout the 1990's and unofficial agreements reached in recent years. However, these advocates routinely fail to address the possibility that Syria may not be able to afford peace. President Assad's regime may benefit from a negotiating process, but not necessarily from a peace agreement. After all, peace with Israel would oblige the regime to largely dismantle the military and security apparatus used to prop up its authority. Could Assad, who heads a minority regime, accept a peace that would undermine his Arab nationalist credentials domestically and regionally, and also threaten his burgeoning strategic alliance with Iran?
While many maintain that Syria's interest in negotiations with Israel is to reclaim the Golan Heights, its leadership has shown in recent years that its true aim is to preserve control over Lebanon. As the late Yitzhak Rabin once put it, "Better Syrian troops in Lebanon than on the Golan." It was his indirect way of admitting that though Syria was negotiating a return of the Golan, the late Hafez Assad was also keen to ensure that Syria maintained its hold over Lebanon. And in fact, that was exactly what happened. Lebanon's negotiating track with Israel was fully absorbed into the Syrian track, a move approved by the Clinton administration and all of the main Arab and European states.
Lastly, the promoters of a Syrian-Israeli negotiating track have failed to provide options to protect Lebanon from persistent efforts by Damascus to re-impose its hegemony over its smaller neighbour. The Hariri tribunal remains a major obstacle, so that international conflict resolution institutions have offered convoluted solutions that respect the tribunal but also ensure the protection of Syria's leadership. Their casuistry has failed to take into consideration that a thorough and legitimate trial process might very well point the finger at the same Syrian leaders whom the promoters of negotiations want to spare.
Lebanon should not pay the price for a Syrian-Israeli dialogue, nor should Syria be denied an opportunity to talk to Israel in goodwill. That is why the international community should impose certain conditions on regional peace talks, which can test Syrian intentions while also guaranteeing Syria's respect for Lebanese sovereignty and independence.
The first condition for international backing for Syrian-Israeli talks has to be Syria's formal acceptance of all UN resolutions relating to Lebanon, particularly Resolutions 1559 and 1701, which Damascus has repeatedly violated. Syria must specifically agree to end its interference in Lebanon and its arming of Lebanese parties. It must also agree to open an embassy in Beirut, something it has never done on the grounds that Lebanese and Syrians are "one people in two countries", and it must agree on final borders with Lebanon.
Syria must also make a clear statement that it will collaborate with the Hariri tribunal and send any Syrian suspects to Holland, where the court is to be set up, not try them in Syrian courts, as Syrian officials have repeatedly insisted. These conditions are now part of international legislation, since Chapter VII authority obliges all parties to obey the tribunal's requests.
Once these conditions are met, a Syrian-Israeli peace track would be eminently desirable. But there is no reason for Lebanon to be Syria's ticket to a settlement. Until this issue is resolved, Syria and Israel are likely to tiptoe around without going very far.
###
* Michael Young is opinion editor of the Daily Star newspaper in Lebanon. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
~Youth Views~ Humanity doesn't change with geography
Pensee Afifi and Jane Slusark
Cairo/Iowa City, Iowa - The Arab world and the West represent two sides of the same coin. Though we are from different parts of the globe, we are two parts that make up a whole: we live in the same world. In that respect, though we all have our distinct cultures, it is worth remembering — and strengthening — our universal culture.
The most basic roots of global culture are derived from the fact that we, as humans, experience the same basic feelings — pain, love, anger, fear, etc. We all aspire to avoid pain and maximise pleasure. It is the existence of fear that holds us back from forming relationships or trusting another person, especially one we perceive as different from us. Our mutual understanding of how death, life, war and tragedy affect a person should be a platform upon which we can foster respect and friendship. No one wants to lose a son, a mother or a grandfather, so we should all be able to see the insanity of needless violence.
We also understand the personal connection a person has with his or her home or village — it would pain us to see it destroyed. But the shared culture of the world can become clouded through dehumanisation. War is only possible when we perceive the enemy as being less than human. The rhetoric of politics and overzealous leaders allows the mass populous to forget that they have the same heart as the person they "hate" across the border. If you strip away the external factors, what you have left is the same basic individual with the same basic needs.
There are also values, morals and traditions that are respected and appreciated around the globe, such as the role of the family. The form may differ, but the relationship between family members is important in all communities and cultures. In the Arab world, the family represents the past, present and future. It is believed in the Arab world that individuals are not only educated in schools, but also in the home. With that belief, families exert tremendous effort in shaping their children's personalities. Kinship ties also often bring considerable responsibilities; an Arab individual would be considered less of a person without his or her family's ongoing support and guidance.
In the Western world, the independence of individuals plays a larger role in the development of family ties. In that regard, Western families provide education, guidance and support but also teach independence and responsibility to allow individuals to form their own lives outside the family boundaries.
In both cases, the importance of the family is apparent. Although Arab and American students sometimes argue over the level of responsibility and independence expected by the family in their respective cultures, it is easy to realise that though we differ, we still agree that the family plays an important role in education and support.
Countries define their culture by their history. But one may ask, "The history of what?" Most of what is found in schools' textbooks is the history of politics, the history of conflict. Yet, every country has a period they look back on as a darkened era, in which grave mistakes were made, or as "the good old days" when everything was simple and people were happy. Each has had its share of triumphs and trials. It is important to remember the histories, but it is also important not to read too much into them. The grudges of the past should not prevent two nations from respecting each other in the present, or from working together toward a common goal. By focusing on events, we forget the collective feelings, the human aspects that led to the eventual settlement of the conflict.
To achieve true respect and understanding on a global scale, we must interact and focus on our common human characteristics. We are all human beings, and share the same feelings, needs and values. What we forget most of the time is that even though we disagree, we can't separate ourselves from the other side of the coin; we all have something in common. At the very least, we can share in our thirst to understand one another.
###
* Pensee Afifi is a student at the American University in Cairo and Jane Slusark studies at the University of Iowa in Iowa City. They co-wrote this article as part of the Soliya Connect Program's West-Muslim World intercultural dialogue program. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
end
Common Ground News Opinion Columns
Title: Message from the Prophet is clear: coexist
Author: Hisham al-Zoubeir
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 844
Title: The importance of meeting face-to-face
Author: Susan Harrison
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 840
Title: Talk "Lebanon" first
Author: Michael Young
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 692
Title: ~Youth Views~ Humanity doesn't change with geography
Author: Pensee Afifi and Jane Slusark
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 691
**********
Message from the Prophet is clear: coexist
Hisham al-Zoubeir
Washington, DC РAs the world watches the terrible eruption of violence between Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq and is subjected to sporadic communiqu̩s by vigilantes calling for violence against their opponents both within the Muslim community and without, many who are unfamiliar with Islam and Muslims may be forgiven for thinking the worst of both the religion and its followers. Yet in Islam and Muslim history, the precedent for religious co-existence is primordial.
The Qur'anic view of the carpenter from Nazareth is clear: Jesus is called the Spirit of God, and the Messiah. Moses is described as the prophet to whom God spoke directly, without any veil. Muslims still revere those men, and their followers are accorded special places within the book of Islam.
The Arabian Prophet, Muhammad, sent according to Islamic tradition as a "mercy to all the worlds", showed us how these theological abstractions were exemplified in practice in the first interfaith meeting between Muslims and Christians - held some 14 centuries ago.
A delegation of sixty Christians from a community about 450 miles south of the Prophet's city, Medina, visited him in the year 631. During this three-day meeting between representatives of one faith-community with the founder of another, the model of Muslim ethics vis-Ã -vis the religious "other" was made explicit for all time. There are many lessons to be drawn from this encounter, but three stand out.
The first is that neither the Christians nor the Muslims pretended to be other than what they were. The Christians insisted on Trinitarianism, and the Prophet rejected it as a matter of faith. Both sides believed that Christ was the Messiah, that he had been born without a father, and that he received revelation from God. There was no shying away from difference, but the search for common ground was primary. Remember the culture of the time - the Prophet held the upper hand as the leader of a powerful community - but he did not disrespect his guests, who were politically powerless.
The second was that difference was not a cause of religious conflict. When the Christians suggested they go out into the desert to perform mass, the Prophet invited them to carry out their rituals within his mosque. He did not partake of their rituals, but he invited them into his own place of worship to carry them out. This was not mere tolerance: this was respect, if not acceptance. He met them with what he considered to be absolute truths, but not as a bigot.
Later generations of Muslims took his practice very seriously: when he said that the rights of non-Muslims under the protection of the Islamic polity were sacrosanct, that he would be a witness for them on the Day of Judgement, Muslims listened. The millions of non-Muslims who are still very much a part of the Muslim world are testimony to that. The situation was not perfect, but non-Muslim historians record that it was the best model of its time.
The third lesson was that difference did not mean that co-existence on a social and political level was impossible. The Christians nonetheless accepted the Prophet as their guarantor in the political realm, and for 14 centuries other Christian communities have accepted Muslim rulers as their guarantors, with their lives, property and religion safeguarded in exchange for a tax, similar to the tax Muslims paid to their temporal authorities.
The above encounter with the Christians of Najran was by no means an isolated event in the life of the Prophet which points to ongoing interfaith relations. An earlier treaty, the documentation of which is still in existence, with Christians of Sinai bore this practice out:
"This is a message from Muhammad son of Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far: we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers (people of Medina), and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by God! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate."
None of the above was a medieval call for syncretism, nor should it be understood to be a denial that Islam, a universal religion, did call for Muslims to be fully committed to their faith. Rather, this was placing into Muslim ethics the need to respect the religious other, by respectfully engaging this other.
The Prophet is known to have claimed that he was not sent "except to perfect good manners", and his display of respect and co-existence is a model that has become sorely lacking in many parts of the world. While some may have forgotten his example, his practice nonetheless established precedents that we would do well to heed today with renewed commitment.
###
* Hisham al-Zoubeir is a researcher of classical Islamic thought. He holds a Ph.D. in the history of European Muslims, and writes on Islam-West relations. This article is part of a series on apostasy and proselytism distributed by the Common Ground News Service and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
The importance of meeting face-to-face
Susan Harrison
Toronto - Does it matter if we meet face-to-face?
In 2004 I went to Qom, Iran to participate in a conference called "Revelation and Authority", a dialogue between North American Christian Mennonite scholars and local Muslim Shiite scholars. A few months ago, we met again - this time in Waterloo in Ontario, Canada. It was a joyful, collegial reunion and, in addition, a nonverbal connection seemed to occur when we looked at each other again, face-to-face.
Each time we gather for dialogue, there is a kind of audible relief in realising that we both really exist, that we are dedicated to making this dialogue happen.
Face-to-face meetings are the moment when the research and media-informed opinions we hold are measured against the experience of the encounter with the other. There is something profound about meeting face-to-face: noticing that someone limps or has a hard time staying awake in a long lecture, seeing the way someone's eyes light up when they hear a new idea, or watching the quizzical looks on a Muslim's face when a Mennonite explains the worship of a triune God (a God in 3 forms).
People are like "living books", but unlike a published paperback, our plots are constantly changing. And, as living books, our stories interact with each other when we meet; they take account of the new characters, who in turn affect the plot line and the ensuing chapters.
However, these kinds of meetings are becoming increasingly more difficult to arrange these days because travel visas are regularly denied on both sides. Tense political relations in past months and tighter borders in the wake of 9/11 have resulted in stringent travel restrictions and have made such face-to-face visits more difficult.
The Mennonite Central Committee (MCC), a religion-based non-profit development organisation, first became involved in Iran following the 1990 earthquake. A friendship formed between Ed Martin, the then-director of MCC's Asia desk and the Director General of International Affairs in Iran, Sadreddin Sadr. Working together in disaster relief, they shared a vision to build relationships that would un-demonise Iranians for North Americans and vice versa. A student exchange program was proposed and Toronto, Canada, where a sizeable Mennonite graduate student community could be found, became the venue. The Imam Khomeini Education and Research Institute (IKERI) volunteered to host Christian Mennonite students in Qom.
In addition to the student exchange program, which began in 1998, the MCC developed "learning tours" that brought groups to Iran on itinerated programs. Two tours of 10 days each allowed Mennonites and Muslims to meet and learn about each other first hand.
An example of the power of first hand meetings is captured in the remark of an Iranian Muslim, attending a Canadian school: "meeting face-to-face works as a source of miraculous mutual understanding. I can say that people who are afraid of you, as a Muslim or as an Iranian, after 10 to 30 minutes of conversation begin to recognise you as a human being."
As I write this, I am aware that I had been planning on attending a conference, "One God of Abraham, Different Traditions", at Eastern Mennonite University in September 2007. The participants were Mennonite scholars and a guest delegation from the Islamic Republic of Iran led by Ayatollah Araqi, head of the Organization of Culture and Islamic Relations. The delegation included Iranian religious leaders and scholars, Morris Motamed, a Jewish member of Iran's Parliament and Archbishop Sarkissian of the Armenian Church in Iran.
One week before the guests were due to arrive, 4 out of 15 visas were refused for "security reasons", though the US State Department did not send this message in writing. Since Ayatollah Araqi was among those refused entry, the visit was unfortunately called off.
This is not only a US-specific problem. In May 2007, 15 North American Mennonites were denied entry into Iran for a fully itinerated learning tour. During this same time, the Western media accused the institute of having a direct line to President Ahmadinejad's government, and critics accused the MCC of therefore supporting Ahmadinejad's government by association with IKERI.
The notion that dialogue between people of different faiths poses a security risk to their home countries continues to be the underlying theme of this ongoing problem of blocked encounters. N. Gerald Shenk, a professor at Eastern Mennonite University, wonders "whether the freedom protected by 'security' overrides the freedom to build better understanding across these dangerous divides."
Face-to-face encounters, according to contact theories, will break down stereotypes and build the understanding and trust that is greatly needed between the West and Iran. Yet as Martin remarked when the visas were refused, "It is back to 'square one' to figure out how to develop relationships of understanding, trust and friendship between Iranians and Americans that will prevent war between our countries."
While people can criticise the MCC for engaging with IKERI as Muslim dialogue partners, the fact remains that a constructive relationship has developed between the two communities, and if allowed to grow it could influence the stories of those individuals who are touched by it.
###
* Susan Kennel Harrison is a PhD candidate at the Toronto School of Theology and has been coordinating the Toronto side of the MCC student exchange with Iran since 1998. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
Talk "Lebanon" first
Michael Young
Beirut - For many Lebanese, Syrian involvement in regional peace negotiations is only desirable if its practical outcome is increased respect for Lebanese sovereignty and independence.
However, the Lebanese are not that optimistic. They fear that once negotiations begin between Syria and Israel, the international community will have little mind to support the international court prosecuting those involved in the February 2005 assassination of the former Lebanese Prime Minister, Rafiq Hariri. Syria remains a prime suspect in that crime and has systematically sought to derail efforts to establish the tribunal in Lebanon. And though the UN Security Council approved the tribunal under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, Syria's peace talks with Israel could earn Damascus a reprieve.
Advocates of Syrian-Israeli talks have underlined the importance of a breakthrough, arguing that Syria and Israel are much closer to a settlement than the Palestinians and Israelis, thanks largely to negotiations throughout the 1990's and unofficial agreements reached in recent years. However, these advocates routinely fail to address the possibility that Syria may not be able to afford peace. President Assad's regime may benefit from a negotiating process, but not necessarily from a peace agreement. After all, peace with Israel would oblige the regime to largely dismantle the military and security apparatus used to prop up its authority. Could Assad, who heads a minority regime, accept a peace that would undermine his Arab nationalist credentials domestically and regionally, and also threaten his burgeoning strategic alliance with Iran?
While many maintain that Syria's interest in negotiations with Israel is to reclaim the Golan Heights, its leadership has shown in recent years that its true aim is to preserve control over Lebanon. As the late Yitzhak Rabin once put it, "Better Syrian troops in Lebanon than on the Golan." It was his indirect way of admitting that though Syria was negotiating a return of the Golan, the late Hafez Assad was also keen to ensure that Syria maintained its hold over Lebanon. And in fact, that was exactly what happened. Lebanon's negotiating track with Israel was fully absorbed into the Syrian track, a move approved by the Clinton administration and all of the main Arab and European states.
Lastly, the promoters of a Syrian-Israeli negotiating track have failed to provide options to protect Lebanon from persistent efforts by Damascus to re-impose its hegemony over its smaller neighbour. The Hariri tribunal remains a major obstacle, so that international conflict resolution institutions have offered convoluted solutions that respect the tribunal but also ensure the protection of Syria's leadership. Their casuistry has failed to take into consideration that a thorough and legitimate trial process might very well point the finger at the same Syrian leaders whom the promoters of negotiations want to spare.
Lebanon should not pay the price for a Syrian-Israeli dialogue, nor should Syria be denied an opportunity to talk to Israel in goodwill. That is why the international community should impose certain conditions on regional peace talks, which can test Syrian intentions while also guaranteeing Syria's respect for Lebanese sovereignty and independence.
The first condition for international backing for Syrian-Israeli talks has to be Syria's formal acceptance of all UN resolutions relating to Lebanon, particularly Resolutions 1559 and 1701, which Damascus has repeatedly violated. Syria must specifically agree to end its interference in Lebanon and its arming of Lebanese parties. It must also agree to open an embassy in Beirut, something it has never done on the grounds that Lebanese and Syrians are "one people in two countries", and it must agree on final borders with Lebanon.
Syria must also make a clear statement that it will collaborate with the Hariri tribunal and send any Syrian suspects to Holland, where the court is to be set up, not try them in Syrian courts, as Syrian officials have repeatedly insisted. These conditions are now part of international legislation, since Chapter VII authority obliges all parties to obey the tribunal's requests.
Once these conditions are met, a Syrian-Israeli peace track would be eminently desirable. But there is no reason for Lebanon to be Syria's ticket to a settlement. Until this issue is resolved, Syria and Israel are likely to tiptoe around without going very far.
###
* Michael Young is opinion editor of the Daily Star newspaper in Lebanon. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
~Youth Views~ Humanity doesn't change with geography
Pensee Afifi and Jane Slusark
Cairo/Iowa City, Iowa - The Arab world and the West represent two sides of the same coin. Though we are from different parts of the globe, we are two parts that make up a whole: we live in the same world. In that respect, though we all have our distinct cultures, it is worth remembering — and strengthening — our universal culture.
The most basic roots of global culture are derived from the fact that we, as humans, experience the same basic feelings — pain, love, anger, fear, etc. We all aspire to avoid pain and maximise pleasure. It is the existence of fear that holds us back from forming relationships or trusting another person, especially one we perceive as different from us. Our mutual understanding of how death, life, war and tragedy affect a person should be a platform upon which we can foster respect and friendship. No one wants to lose a son, a mother or a grandfather, so we should all be able to see the insanity of needless violence.
We also understand the personal connection a person has with his or her home or village — it would pain us to see it destroyed. But the shared culture of the world can become clouded through dehumanisation. War is only possible when we perceive the enemy as being less than human. The rhetoric of politics and overzealous leaders allows the mass populous to forget that they have the same heart as the person they "hate" across the border. If you strip away the external factors, what you have left is the same basic individual with the same basic needs.
There are also values, morals and traditions that are respected and appreciated around the globe, such as the role of the family. The form may differ, but the relationship between family members is important in all communities and cultures. In the Arab world, the family represents the past, present and future. It is believed in the Arab world that individuals are not only educated in schools, but also in the home. With that belief, families exert tremendous effort in shaping their children's personalities. Kinship ties also often bring considerable responsibilities; an Arab individual would be considered less of a person without his or her family's ongoing support and guidance.
In the Western world, the independence of individuals plays a larger role in the development of family ties. In that regard, Western families provide education, guidance and support but also teach independence and responsibility to allow individuals to form their own lives outside the family boundaries.
In both cases, the importance of the family is apparent. Although Arab and American students sometimes argue over the level of responsibility and independence expected by the family in their respective cultures, it is easy to realise that though we differ, we still agree that the family plays an important role in education and support.
Countries define their culture by their history. But one may ask, "The history of what?" Most of what is found in schools' textbooks is the history of politics, the history of conflict. Yet, every country has a period they look back on as a darkened era, in which grave mistakes were made, or as "the good old days" when everything was simple and people were happy. Each has had its share of triumphs and trials. It is important to remember the histories, but it is also important not to read too much into them. The grudges of the past should not prevent two nations from respecting each other in the present, or from working together toward a common goal. By focusing on events, we forget the collective feelings, the human aspects that led to the eventual settlement of the conflict.
To achieve true respect and understanding on a global scale, we must interact and focus on our common human characteristics. We are all human beings, and share the same feelings, needs and values. What we forget most of the time is that even though we disagree, we can't separate ourselves from the other side of the coin; we all have something in common. At the very least, we can share in our thirst to understand one another.
###
* Pensee Afifi is a student at the American University in Cairo and Jane Slusark studies at the University of Iowa in Iowa City. They co-wrote this article as part of the Soliya Connect Program's West-Muslim World intercultural dialogue program. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
end
Author: Hisham al-Zoubeir
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 844
Title: The importance of meeting face-to-face
Author: Susan Harrison
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 840
Title: Talk "Lebanon" first
Author: Michael Young
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 692
Title: ~Youth Views~ Humanity doesn't change with geography
Author: Pensee Afifi and Jane Slusark
Source: The Common Ground News Service, 25 September 2007
Word Count: 691
**********
Message from the Prophet is clear: coexist
Hisham al-Zoubeir
Washington, DC РAs the world watches the terrible eruption of violence between Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq and is subjected to sporadic communiqu̩s by vigilantes calling for violence against their opponents both within the Muslim community and without, many who are unfamiliar with Islam and Muslims may be forgiven for thinking the worst of both the religion and its followers. Yet in Islam and Muslim history, the precedent for religious co-existence is primordial.
The Qur'anic view of the carpenter from Nazareth is clear: Jesus is called the Spirit of God, and the Messiah. Moses is described as the prophet to whom God spoke directly, without any veil. Muslims still revere those men, and their followers are accorded special places within the book of Islam.
The Arabian Prophet, Muhammad, sent according to Islamic tradition as a "mercy to all the worlds", showed us how these theological abstractions were exemplified in practice in the first interfaith meeting between Muslims and Christians - held some 14 centuries ago.
A delegation of sixty Christians from a community about 450 miles south of the Prophet's city, Medina, visited him in the year 631. During this three-day meeting between representatives of one faith-community with the founder of another, the model of Muslim ethics vis-Ã -vis the religious "other" was made explicit for all time. There are many lessons to be drawn from this encounter, but three stand out.
The first is that neither the Christians nor the Muslims pretended to be other than what they were. The Christians insisted on Trinitarianism, and the Prophet rejected it as a matter of faith. Both sides believed that Christ was the Messiah, that he had been born without a father, and that he received revelation from God. There was no shying away from difference, but the search for common ground was primary. Remember the culture of the time - the Prophet held the upper hand as the leader of a powerful community - but he did not disrespect his guests, who were politically powerless.
The second was that difference was not a cause of religious conflict. When the Christians suggested they go out into the desert to perform mass, the Prophet invited them to carry out their rituals within his mosque. He did not partake of their rituals, but he invited them into his own place of worship to carry them out. This was not mere tolerance: this was respect, if not acceptance. He met them with what he considered to be absolute truths, but not as a bigot.
Later generations of Muslims took his practice very seriously: when he said that the rights of non-Muslims under the protection of the Islamic polity were sacrosanct, that he would be a witness for them on the Day of Judgement, Muslims listened. The millions of non-Muslims who are still very much a part of the Muslim world are testimony to that. The situation was not perfect, but non-Muslim historians record that it was the best model of its time.
The third lesson was that difference did not mean that co-existence on a social and political level was impossible. The Christians nonetheless accepted the Prophet as their guarantor in the political realm, and for 14 centuries other Christian communities have accepted Muslim rulers as their guarantors, with their lives, property and religion safeguarded in exchange for a tax, similar to the tax Muslims paid to their temporal authorities.
The above encounter with the Christians of Najran was by no means an isolated event in the life of the Prophet which points to ongoing interfaith relations. An earlier treaty, the documentation of which is still in existence, with Christians of Sinai bore this practice out:
"This is a message from Muhammad son of Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far: we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers (people of Medina), and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by God! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate."
None of the above was a medieval call for syncretism, nor should it be understood to be a denial that Islam, a universal religion, did call for Muslims to be fully committed to their faith. Rather, this was placing into Muslim ethics the need to respect the religious other, by respectfully engaging this other.
The Prophet is known to have claimed that he was not sent "except to perfect good manners", and his display of respect and co-existence is a model that has become sorely lacking in many parts of the world. While some may have forgotten his example, his practice nonetheless established precedents that we would do well to heed today with renewed commitment.
###
* Hisham al-Zoubeir is a researcher of classical Islamic thought. He holds a Ph.D. in the history of European Muslims, and writes on Islam-West relations. This article is part of a series on apostasy and proselytism distributed by the Common Ground News Service and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
The importance of meeting face-to-face
Susan Harrison
Toronto - Does it matter if we meet face-to-face?
In 2004 I went to Qom, Iran to participate in a conference called "Revelation and Authority", a dialogue between North American Christian Mennonite scholars and local Muslim Shiite scholars. A few months ago, we met again - this time in Waterloo in Ontario, Canada. It was a joyful, collegial reunion and, in addition, a nonverbal connection seemed to occur when we looked at each other again, face-to-face.
Each time we gather for dialogue, there is a kind of audible relief in realising that we both really exist, that we are dedicated to making this dialogue happen.
Face-to-face meetings are the moment when the research and media-informed opinions we hold are measured against the experience of the encounter with the other. There is something profound about meeting face-to-face: noticing that someone limps or has a hard time staying awake in a long lecture, seeing the way someone's eyes light up when they hear a new idea, or watching the quizzical looks on a Muslim's face when a Mennonite explains the worship of a triune God (a God in 3 forms).
People are like "living books", but unlike a published paperback, our plots are constantly changing. And, as living books, our stories interact with each other when we meet; they take account of the new characters, who in turn affect the plot line and the ensuing chapters.
However, these kinds of meetings are becoming increasingly more difficult to arrange these days because travel visas are regularly denied on both sides. Tense political relations in past months and tighter borders in the wake of 9/11 have resulted in stringent travel restrictions and have made such face-to-face visits more difficult.
The Mennonite Central Committee (MCC), a religion-based non-profit development organisation, first became involved in Iran following the 1990 earthquake. A friendship formed between Ed Martin, the then-director of MCC's Asia desk and the Director General of International Affairs in Iran, Sadreddin Sadr. Working together in disaster relief, they shared a vision to build relationships that would un-demonise Iranians for North Americans and vice versa. A student exchange program was proposed and Toronto, Canada, where a sizeable Mennonite graduate student community could be found, became the venue. The Imam Khomeini Education and Research Institute (IKERI) volunteered to host Christian Mennonite students in Qom.
In addition to the student exchange program, which began in 1998, the MCC developed "learning tours" that brought groups to Iran on itinerated programs. Two tours of 10 days each allowed Mennonites and Muslims to meet and learn about each other first hand.
An example of the power of first hand meetings is captured in the remark of an Iranian Muslim, attending a Canadian school: "meeting face-to-face works as a source of miraculous mutual understanding. I can say that people who are afraid of you, as a Muslim or as an Iranian, after 10 to 30 minutes of conversation begin to recognise you as a human being."
As I write this, I am aware that I had been planning on attending a conference, "One God of Abraham, Different Traditions", at Eastern Mennonite University in September 2007. The participants were Mennonite scholars and a guest delegation from the Islamic Republic of Iran led by Ayatollah Araqi, head of the Organization of Culture and Islamic Relations. The delegation included Iranian religious leaders and scholars, Morris Motamed, a Jewish member of Iran's Parliament and Archbishop Sarkissian of the Armenian Church in Iran.
One week before the guests were due to arrive, 4 out of 15 visas were refused for "security reasons", though the US State Department did not send this message in writing. Since Ayatollah Araqi was among those refused entry, the visit was unfortunately called off.
This is not only a US-specific problem. In May 2007, 15 North American Mennonites were denied entry into Iran for a fully itinerated learning tour. During this same time, the Western media accused the institute of having a direct line to President Ahmadinejad's government, and critics accused the MCC of therefore supporting Ahmadinejad's government by association with IKERI.
The notion that dialogue between people of different faiths poses a security risk to their home countries continues to be the underlying theme of this ongoing problem of blocked encounters. N. Gerald Shenk, a professor at Eastern Mennonite University, wonders "whether the freedom protected by 'security' overrides the freedom to build better understanding across these dangerous divides."
Face-to-face encounters, according to contact theories, will break down stereotypes and build the understanding and trust that is greatly needed between the West and Iran. Yet as Martin remarked when the visas were refused, "It is back to 'square one' to figure out how to develop relationships of understanding, trust and friendship between Iranians and Americans that will prevent war between our countries."
While people can criticise the MCC for engaging with IKERI as Muslim dialogue partners, the fact remains that a constructive relationship has developed between the two communities, and if allowed to grow it could influence the stories of those individuals who are touched by it.
###
* Susan Kennel Harrison is a PhD candidate at the Toronto School of Theology and has been coordinating the Toronto side of the MCC student exchange with Iran since 1998. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
Talk "Lebanon" first
Michael Young
Beirut - For many Lebanese, Syrian involvement in regional peace negotiations is only desirable if its practical outcome is increased respect for Lebanese sovereignty and independence.
However, the Lebanese are not that optimistic. They fear that once negotiations begin between Syria and Israel, the international community will have little mind to support the international court prosecuting those involved in the February 2005 assassination of the former Lebanese Prime Minister, Rafiq Hariri. Syria remains a prime suspect in that crime and has systematically sought to derail efforts to establish the tribunal in Lebanon. And though the UN Security Council approved the tribunal under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, Syria's peace talks with Israel could earn Damascus a reprieve.
Advocates of Syrian-Israeli talks have underlined the importance of a breakthrough, arguing that Syria and Israel are much closer to a settlement than the Palestinians and Israelis, thanks largely to negotiations throughout the 1990's and unofficial agreements reached in recent years. However, these advocates routinely fail to address the possibility that Syria may not be able to afford peace. President Assad's regime may benefit from a negotiating process, but not necessarily from a peace agreement. After all, peace with Israel would oblige the regime to largely dismantle the military and security apparatus used to prop up its authority. Could Assad, who heads a minority regime, accept a peace that would undermine his Arab nationalist credentials domestically and regionally, and also threaten his burgeoning strategic alliance with Iran?
While many maintain that Syria's interest in negotiations with Israel is to reclaim the Golan Heights, its leadership has shown in recent years that its true aim is to preserve control over Lebanon. As the late Yitzhak Rabin once put it, "Better Syrian troops in Lebanon than on the Golan." It was his indirect way of admitting that though Syria was negotiating a return of the Golan, the late Hafez Assad was also keen to ensure that Syria maintained its hold over Lebanon. And in fact, that was exactly what happened. Lebanon's negotiating track with Israel was fully absorbed into the Syrian track, a move approved by the Clinton administration and all of the main Arab and European states.
Lastly, the promoters of a Syrian-Israeli negotiating track have failed to provide options to protect Lebanon from persistent efforts by Damascus to re-impose its hegemony over its smaller neighbour. The Hariri tribunal remains a major obstacle, so that international conflict resolution institutions have offered convoluted solutions that respect the tribunal but also ensure the protection of Syria's leadership. Their casuistry has failed to take into consideration that a thorough and legitimate trial process might very well point the finger at the same Syrian leaders whom the promoters of negotiations want to spare.
Lebanon should not pay the price for a Syrian-Israeli dialogue, nor should Syria be denied an opportunity to talk to Israel in goodwill. That is why the international community should impose certain conditions on regional peace talks, which can test Syrian intentions while also guaranteeing Syria's respect for Lebanese sovereignty and independence.
The first condition for international backing for Syrian-Israeli talks has to be Syria's formal acceptance of all UN resolutions relating to Lebanon, particularly Resolutions 1559 and 1701, which Damascus has repeatedly violated. Syria must specifically agree to end its interference in Lebanon and its arming of Lebanese parties. It must also agree to open an embassy in Beirut, something it has never done on the grounds that Lebanese and Syrians are "one people in two countries", and it must agree on final borders with Lebanon.
Syria must also make a clear statement that it will collaborate with the Hariri tribunal and send any Syrian suspects to Holland, where the court is to be set up, not try them in Syrian courts, as Syrian officials have repeatedly insisted. These conditions are now part of international legislation, since Chapter VII authority obliges all parties to obey the tribunal's requests.
Once these conditions are met, a Syrian-Israeli peace track would be eminently desirable. But there is no reason for Lebanon to be Syria's ticket to a settlement. Until this issue is resolved, Syria and Israel are likely to tiptoe around without going very far.
###
* Michael Young is opinion editor of the Daily Star newspaper in Lebanon. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
**********
~Youth Views~ Humanity doesn't change with geography
Pensee Afifi and Jane Slusark
Cairo/Iowa City, Iowa - The Arab world and the West represent two sides of the same coin. Though we are from different parts of the globe, we are two parts that make up a whole: we live in the same world. In that respect, though we all have our distinct cultures, it is worth remembering — and strengthening — our universal culture.
The most basic roots of global culture are derived from the fact that we, as humans, experience the same basic feelings — pain, love, anger, fear, etc. We all aspire to avoid pain and maximise pleasure. It is the existence of fear that holds us back from forming relationships or trusting another person, especially one we perceive as different from us. Our mutual understanding of how death, life, war and tragedy affect a person should be a platform upon which we can foster respect and friendship. No one wants to lose a son, a mother or a grandfather, so we should all be able to see the insanity of needless violence.
We also understand the personal connection a person has with his or her home or village — it would pain us to see it destroyed. But the shared culture of the world can become clouded through dehumanisation. War is only possible when we perceive the enemy as being less than human. The rhetoric of politics and overzealous leaders allows the mass populous to forget that they have the same heart as the person they "hate" across the border. If you strip away the external factors, what you have left is the same basic individual with the same basic needs.
There are also values, morals and traditions that are respected and appreciated around the globe, such as the role of the family. The form may differ, but the relationship between family members is important in all communities and cultures. In the Arab world, the family represents the past, present and future. It is believed in the Arab world that individuals are not only educated in schools, but also in the home. With that belief, families exert tremendous effort in shaping their children's personalities. Kinship ties also often bring considerable responsibilities; an Arab individual would be considered less of a person without his or her family's ongoing support and guidance.
In the Western world, the independence of individuals plays a larger role in the development of family ties. In that regard, Western families provide education, guidance and support but also teach independence and responsibility to allow individuals to form their own lives outside the family boundaries.
In both cases, the importance of the family is apparent. Although Arab and American students sometimes argue over the level of responsibility and independence expected by the family in their respective cultures, it is easy to realise that though we differ, we still agree that the family plays an important role in education and support.
Countries define their culture by their history. But one may ask, "The history of what?" Most of what is found in schools' textbooks is the history of politics, the history of conflict. Yet, every country has a period they look back on as a darkened era, in which grave mistakes were made, or as "the good old days" when everything was simple and people were happy. Each has had its share of triumphs and trials. It is important to remember the histories, but it is also important not to read too much into them. The grudges of the past should not prevent two nations from respecting each other in the present, or from working together toward a common goal. By focusing on events, we forget the collective feelings, the human aspects that led to the eventual settlement of the conflict.
To achieve true respect and understanding on a global scale, we must interact and focus on our common human characteristics. We are all human beings, and share the same feelings, needs and values. What we forget most of the time is that even though we disagree, we can't separate ourselves from the other side of the coin; we all have something in common. At the very least, we can share in our thirst to understand one another.
###
* Pensee Afifi is a student at the American University in Cairo and Jane Slusark studies at the University of Iowa in Iowa City. They co-wrote this article as part of the Soliya Connect Program's West-Muslim World intercultural dialogue program. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 25 September 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
end
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Israel denies Christian Arab clergy entrance to West Bank
Israel Denies Re-entry Visas to Holy Land Arab Christian Clergy
23-Sep-07
The Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation (HCEF)
Toll free at +1-866-871-HCEF (4233)
The Israeli Government has rescinded its policy of granting re-entry visas to Arab Christian ministers, priests, nuns and other religious workers who wish to travel in and out of the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories, according to information provided to the Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation (HCEF) by Christian clergy in Jerusalem.
Until now, re-entry visas were normally granted in Israel by the Israeli Government to Arab Christian religious workers in the Holy Land, and clergy traveled relatively freely to and from points overseas, including the United States.
However, HCEF has been informed that Arab Christian church workers will henceforth have to apply for re-entry visas at Israeli consulates abroad each time they travel outside the areas of Israeli control.
Since visa applications submitted to Israeli missions abroad are normally not acted upon for months after they are filed, his new Israeli policy means that religious personnel will no longer be able to move freely between their parishes in the occupied territories and any points out side of those areas.
Christian church workers normally travel frequently between their parishes and their churches’ offices in Jerusalem. Some also must travel often to countries outside the region, including the United States.
Many of the clergy and other church workers in the occupied Palestinian territories are from nearby Jordan; the new Israeli policy will prevent them from visiting their families there.
Indeed, that has already happened. Rev. Fares Khleifat, a pastor and the only Greek Melkite priest in Ramallah, traveled to Jordan for several days in mid-September; when he tried to return to his parish on September 14, he was stopped at the Israeli border, and his valid, multiple-entry visa was canceled.
Forced to remain in Jordan, he has been effectively deported from the Holy Land by the Israeli government, and his parish now has no priest.
The new Israeli policy makes it unlikely that any Arab Christian priests, ministers or other religious workers from the Holy Land will be able to attend HCEF’s Ninth International Conference, scheduled for October 26-27 in Washington.
Christian personnel based in the Holy Land have participated in all eight previous conferences of the Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation.
http://www.hcef.org/index.cfm/mod/news/ID/16/SubMod/NewsView/NewsID/1849.cfm
23-Sep-07
The Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation (HCEF)
Toll free at +1-866-871-HCEF (4233)
The Israeli Government has rescinded its policy of granting re-entry visas to Arab Christian ministers, priests, nuns and other religious workers who wish to travel in and out of the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories, according to information provided to the Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation (HCEF) by Christian clergy in Jerusalem.
Until now, re-entry visas were normally granted in Israel by the Israeli Government to Arab Christian religious workers in the Holy Land, and clergy traveled relatively freely to and from points overseas, including the United States.
However, HCEF has been informed that Arab Christian church workers will henceforth have to apply for re-entry visas at Israeli consulates abroad each time they travel outside the areas of Israeli control.
Since visa applications submitted to Israeli missions abroad are normally not acted upon for months after they are filed, his new Israeli policy means that religious personnel will no longer be able to move freely between their parishes in the occupied territories and any points out side of those areas.
Christian church workers normally travel frequently between their parishes and their churches’ offices in Jerusalem. Some also must travel often to countries outside the region, including the United States.
Many of the clergy and other church workers in the occupied Palestinian territories are from nearby Jordan; the new Israeli policy will prevent them from visiting their families there.
Indeed, that has already happened. Rev. Fares Khleifat, a pastor and the only Greek Melkite priest in Ramallah, traveled to Jordan for several days in mid-September; when he tried to return to his parish on September 14, he was stopped at the Israeli border, and his valid, multiple-entry visa was canceled.
Forced to remain in Jordan, he has been effectively deported from the Holy Land by the Israeli government, and his parish now has no priest.
The new Israeli policy makes it unlikely that any Arab Christian priests, ministers or other religious workers from the Holy Land will be able to attend HCEF’s Ninth International Conference, scheduled for October 26-27 in Washington.
Christian personnel based in the Holy Land have participated in all eight previous conferences of the Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation.
http://www.hcef.org/index.cfm/mod/news/ID/16/SubMod/NewsView/NewsID/1849.cfm
Sunday, September 23, 2007
New Political Cartoons launched in Syndication
The Arab American Writers Group Syndicate (ArabWritersGroup.com) announced a new Political Cartoon series in syndication. The cartoons are posted twice each week and feature satire and commentary on current news events, particularly those on Middle East issues.
You can view the cartoons at http://www.arabwritersgroup.com/ or at http://arabwritersgroup.wordpress.com/ or at www.hanania.com/cartoons/cartoons.htm
The cartoons are available for a small syndication fee or by arrangement.
# # #
You can view the cartoons at http://www.arabwritersgroup.com/ or at http://arabwritersgroup.wordpress.com/ or at www.hanania.com/cartoons/cartoons.htm
The cartoons are available for a small syndication fee or by arrangement.
# # #
Monday, September 17, 2007
Creative Writing Class at Arab Museum in Dearborn
FREE CREATIVE WRITING WORKSHOP AT AANM
Dearborn, MI (September 17, 2007) – The Arab American National Museum invites all budding authors to attend a free interactive creative writing workshop from 1-2:30 p.m. on Saturday, October 6.
The workshop is presented by Haley Elizabeth Garwood, author of the Warrior Queen series of novels based on actual historical figures and published by Writers Block. Garwood’s 2005 title Zenobia chronicles the adventures of a Syrian queen of the Third Century A.D. When Zenobia’s king-husband is assassinated by the Romans, a supposed ally, she rallies her own troops to avenge his death and protect her home city of Palmyra.
Garwood will also do a brief reading from Zenobia at the conclusion of the workshop. Read more about the author at http://www.haleyelizabethgarwood.com/.
Those wishing to attend the free creative writing workshop must RSVP by calling 313.624.0200 or emailing fsaad@accesscommunity.org.
The Arab American National Museum documents, preserves, celebrates, and educates the public on the history, life, culture, and contributions of Arab Americans. We serve as a resource to enhance knowledge and understanding about Arab Americans and their presence in this country. The Arab American National Museum is a project of ACCESS, a Dearborn, Michigan-based nonprofit human services and cultural organization. Learn more at http://www.arabamericanmuseum.org/ and http://www.accesscommunity.org/.
The Museum is located at 13624 Michigan Avenue, Dearborn, MI, 48126. Museum hours: 10 a.m.-6 p.m. Wednesday, Friday and Saturday; 10 a.m.-8 p.m. Thursday; noon- 5 p.m. Sunday. Closed Monday, Tuesday; Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year’s Day. Admission is $6 for adults; $3 for students, seniors and children 6-12; ages 5 and under, free. Call 313-582-2266 for further information.
###
Kim Silarski
Communications
313-624-0206
Arab American National Museum
13624 Michigan Avenue
Dearborn, MI 48126
http://www.arabamericanmuseum.org/
Dearborn, MI (September 17, 2007) – The Arab American National Museum invites all budding authors to attend a free interactive creative writing workshop from 1-2:30 p.m. on Saturday, October 6.
The workshop is presented by Haley Elizabeth Garwood, author of the Warrior Queen series of novels based on actual historical figures and published by Writers Block. Garwood’s 2005 title Zenobia chronicles the adventures of a Syrian queen of the Third Century A.D. When Zenobia’s king-husband is assassinated by the Romans, a supposed ally, she rallies her own troops to avenge his death and protect her home city of Palmyra.
Garwood will also do a brief reading from Zenobia at the conclusion of the workshop. Read more about the author at http://www.haleyelizabethgarwood.com/.
Those wishing to attend the free creative writing workshop must RSVP by calling 313.624.0200 or emailing fsaad@accesscommunity.org.
The Arab American National Museum documents, preserves, celebrates, and educates the public on the history, life, culture, and contributions of Arab Americans. We serve as a resource to enhance knowledge and understanding about Arab Americans and their presence in this country. The Arab American National Museum is a project of ACCESS, a Dearborn, Michigan-based nonprofit human services and cultural organization. Learn more at http://www.arabamericanmuseum.org/ and http://www.accesscommunity.org/.
The Museum is located at 13624 Michigan Avenue, Dearborn, MI, 48126. Museum hours: 10 a.m.-6 p.m. Wednesday, Friday and Saturday; 10 a.m.-8 p.m. Thursday; noon- 5 p.m. Sunday. Closed Monday, Tuesday; Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year’s Day. Admission is $6 for adults; $3 for students, seniors and children 6-12; ages 5 and under, free. Call 313-582-2266 for further information.
###
Kim Silarski
Communications
313-624-0206
Arab American National Museum
13624 Michigan Avenue
Dearborn, MI 48126
http://www.arabamericanmuseum.org/
Friday, September 14, 2007
Arguments filed in Guantanamo detainess case on religious abuse
Baptist Joint Committee200 Maryland Avenue NEWashington, D.C. 20002For Immediate Release Contacts: Jeff HuettSeptember 14, 2007 Phallan Davis 202-544-4226
Oral arguments today in case filed by Guantanamo detainees concerning religious abuse claims
WASHINGTON —Oral arguments are being heard today before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in a government appeal for a lower court decision holding that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) provides broad protection for the free exercise rights of military personnel and detainees at Guantanamo, according to an amicus brief submitted by the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty and other religious organizations. The brief was filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in the case of Rasul, et al. v. Rumsfeld, et al.The case centers on four British citizens who were detained by American forces in Afghanistan, transported to Guantanamo Bay and subsequently released without charge after two years. While there, the men alleged repeated and systematic acts of harassment based on their Muslim faith, including forced shaving of their beards, interruption or prohibition of their efforts to pray, the denial of prayer mats and copies of the Koran, mistreatment of the Koran in their presence by guards who kicked it and threw it in a toilet bucket, and being forced to pray with exposed genital areas. The plaintiffs brought a suit seeking damages against U.S. government officials, claiming violations of the Alien Tort Statute, the Fifth and Eighth amendments to the U.S. Constitution, the Geneva Convention and RFRA. The district court dismissed the plaintiff’s international law and constitutional claims, but ruled that RFRA applies, even to claims arising from those held at Guantanamo Bay. The defendants appealed that decision to the D.C. Circuit. RFRA provides that “Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability,” unless it can demonstrate that doing so is “in furtherance of a compelling government interest,” and “is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling government interest.” RFRA reflects the commitment of the diverse coalition that supported its passage in 1993. By design, RFRA’s protections apply to the federal government, without exception for particular branches, and to all religions.BJC General Counsel K. Hollyn Hollman said individuals and faith communities from across the religious spectrum recognize that our country’s commitment to religious freedom is one of its greatest attributes.“RFRA is a limitation on governmental interference with religious practice,” Hollman said. “Its protections are intentionally broad and reflect the widely shared belief that religious freedom is paramount. “RFRA, like the First Amendment itself, reflects our nation’s high regard for religion and for religious liberty” Hollman said. “We should be alarmed any time the government seeks to narrow those protections.” In its friend-of-the-court brief, the BJC acknowledged grave concerns about terrorism and the agency’s intent not to encumber the government’s efforts to bring culpable parties to justice, while arguing RFRA’s high standard for the federal government in accommodating religious practice and respecting religious diversity be preserved.Those joining the brief include American Jewish Committee, National Association of Evangelicals, National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Presbyterian Church (USA) and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. All have participated in various ways in the efforts of the Coalition for the Free Exercise of Religion, the coalition of dozens of religious organizations that supported the passage of RFRA.The Baptist Joint Committee is a 70-year-old, Washington, D.C.-based religious liberty organization that works to defend and extend God-given religious liberty for all, bringing a uniquely Baptist witness to the principle that religion must be freely exercised, neither advanced nor inhibited by government.—30—
Jeff Huett, communications director Baptist Joint Committee 200 Maryland Avenue, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20002
Oral arguments today in case filed by Guantanamo detainees concerning religious abuse claims
WASHINGTON —Oral arguments are being heard today before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in a government appeal for a lower court decision holding that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) provides broad protection for the free exercise rights of military personnel and detainees at Guantanamo, according to an amicus brief submitted by the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty and other religious organizations. The brief was filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in the case of Rasul, et al. v. Rumsfeld, et al.The case centers on four British citizens who were detained by American forces in Afghanistan, transported to Guantanamo Bay and subsequently released without charge after two years. While there, the men alleged repeated and systematic acts of harassment based on their Muslim faith, including forced shaving of their beards, interruption or prohibition of their efforts to pray, the denial of prayer mats and copies of the Koran, mistreatment of the Koran in their presence by guards who kicked it and threw it in a toilet bucket, and being forced to pray with exposed genital areas. The plaintiffs brought a suit seeking damages against U.S. government officials, claiming violations of the Alien Tort Statute, the Fifth and Eighth amendments to the U.S. Constitution, the Geneva Convention and RFRA. The district court dismissed the plaintiff’s international law and constitutional claims, but ruled that RFRA applies, even to claims arising from those held at Guantanamo Bay. The defendants appealed that decision to the D.C. Circuit. RFRA provides that “Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability,” unless it can demonstrate that doing so is “in furtherance of a compelling government interest,” and “is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling government interest.” RFRA reflects the commitment of the diverse coalition that supported its passage in 1993. By design, RFRA’s protections apply to the federal government, without exception for particular branches, and to all religions.BJC General Counsel K. Hollyn Hollman said individuals and faith communities from across the religious spectrum recognize that our country’s commitment to religious freedom is one of its greatest attributes.“RFRA is a limitation on governmental interference with religious practice,” Hollman said. “Its protections are intentionally broad and reflect the widely shared belief that religious freedom is paramount. “RFRA, like the First Amendment itself, reflects our nation’s high regard for religion and for religious liberty” Hollman said. “We should be alarmed any time the government seeks to narrow those protections.” In its friend-of-the-court brief, the BJC acknowledged grave concerns about terrorism and the agency’s intent not to encumber the government’s efforts to bring culpable parties to justice, while arguing RFRA’s high standard for the federal government in accommodating religious practice and respecting religious diversity be preserved.Those joining the brief include American Jewish Committee, National Association of Evangelicals, National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Presbyterian Church (USA) and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. All have participated in various ways in the efforts of the Coalition for the Free Exercise of Religion, the coalition of dozens of religious organizations that supported the passage of RFRA.The Baptist Joint Committee is a 70-year-old, Washington, D.C.-based religious liberty organization that works to defend and extend God-given religious liberty for all, bringing a uniquely Baptist witness to the principle that religion must be freely exercised, neither advanced nor inhibited by government.—30—
Jeff Huett, communications director Baptist Joint Committee 200 Maryland Avenue, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20002
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe to Ray's
Join Ray Hanania on the
Follow Ray Hanania's 
