Evidence that the ban on women’s driving in Saudi Arabia is sociological rather than religious abounds. Arab News interviews a handful of Saudi women who have been driving since they were teenagers and are now in their middle ages. They have been free to drive and have done so, generally without problems, in the rural villages and towns of the country. Male-centric bureaucracy still can interfere, as when only a male is permitted to file an accident report with the police, a necessity for getting a vehicle repaired, but male neighbors don’t seem to get wrapped around any philosophical axle when it comes to letting women drive without harassment.
Maybe Saudi ‘city slickers’ have a thing or two they can still learn from their bumpkin cousins…
Rural women defy tradition by driving on desert roads
AL-KHURMA: Noura Hamdan, 55, has been behind the wheel since the age of 17, despite the fact there is ban on women driving in the Kingdom.
When still a teenager, she used to drive a tanker that transported water, which would then be distributed among local villagers. As she grew up, Noura became popular among the residents in her remote desert region.
Even though Noura had heard about the controversy raging in the Kingdom’s cities about whether to allow women to drive or not, it never bothered her.
Speaking to Al-Riyadh Arabic daily, Noura recalls that she never encountered any awkward situation since she started driving.
“This is mainly because of the cooperation and respect that was showered upon me in our desert community. Nobody in our region sees women behind the wheel as a strange thing. As far as people in the remote desert regions are concerned, this is a necessity,” she said.
…
Instead of a rehash of stories of grief, anger, terror, I’d like to point to a guest post appearing on Zen Pundit blog that takes a serious look at religion, its uses, abuses, and misuses. Do follow the links internal to the piece that go to arguments, made by Muslims, against Islamic extremism.
The article is not about Islam exclusively: contemporary Christian and Jewish extremism are addressed, Hindu and Buddhist extremism only briefly. I think the article worth your attention.
In a Time of Religious Arousal
Charles CameronWe live in times of considerable religious arousal – witness the Manhattan mosque and cultural center controversy, the on-again, off-again Florida Quran burning, last week’s Glenn Beck rally at the Lincoln Memorial,Hindutva violence against Muslims in India, Muslim violence against Christians, the wars ongoing or drawing to an end in Afghanistan and Iraq, the threat of an Israeli or American attack on Iran, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and peace process… In each of these instances, religious arousal has a role to play.
It would require considerable care, research, and craftsmanship to produce a nuanced and appropriately balanced view of human nature, the current state of the world, American, European and Islamic popular, polite and political opinions, the global admixture of peoples and approaches that characterize Islam, the history of violence, religious and otherwise, the braiding in different times and places of religion with politics, the roots of violence, the roots of peace and its meanings both as a state of cessation of conflict and as a state of contemplative calm…
Such a presentation would require at least a book-length treatment, and cannot be trotted out every time some new spark emerges from the ancient fires… but perhaps I can lay out some of my own considerations about the topic here, in somewhat condensed form.
…
While the media-hyped story of Quran-burning dominates the news, life goes on. The Eid has begun. The Middle East thrashes, no closer to peace. And, as Arab News reports with this Associated Press article, a new Islamic college opens its doors in California.
New Muslim college welcomes freshmen in California
TERENCE CHEA | APBERKELEY, California: Amid the uproar over the proposed mosque near the site of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in New York, a new Islamic college recently opened its doors in California with plans to educate a new generation of Muslim-American leaders.
Founded by three prominent Islamic scholars, Zaytuna College in Berkeley is a small school with just five faculty members and 15 students in its inaugural freshman class. The school wants to become the first fully accredited Muslim academic institution in the United States.
Zaytuna College is opening at a time when fierce opposition to the proposed Islamic community center and mosque near the former World Trade Center has left many American Muslims feeling under siege.
Many mosques are boosting security this week ahead of the Sept. 11 anniversary that some fear could bring trouble to Muslim communities. And the leader of a small Florida church that espouses anti-Islam philosophy is determined to burn copies of the Qur’an on Sept. 11.
…
I see this college more as an essay into education than a fully functional college. I see nothing in the piece noting its accreditation, other than the assumed accreditation by the state of California. That doesn’t mean a whole lot, however, as California routinely accredits all sorts of strange schools, diploma mills among them. I do find it interesting that the college is operating out of rooms rented from the American Baptist Seminary, however.
I do draw your attention to a statement by Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy, a conservative think-tank mostly critical of Islam. He “accuses the school of seeking to indoctrinate students and spread Islam in America.” I’ve some important news for Mr Gaffney. There is absolutely nothing wrong with trying to spread Islam in the US (or elsewhere). The US Constitution, wisely, offers no barrier to proselytizing or religious indoctrination. Islam is free to seek converts in every corner of the US. Theoretically, it could even succeed in converting a majority of Americans to Islam, with full constitutional protection to do so. If that worries Mr Gaffney, then he needs to try amending the Constitution. He will fail in that attempt.
Arguing with fruitcakes only makes everyone sticky. CNN reports that Imam Muhammad Musri, of the Islamic Society of Central Florida, is denying that he ever made any ‘deal’ with the (ironically named) Dove World Outreach Center about moving the 51Park project.
No deal made to halt Quran burning, Muslim leader says
(CNN) — A Florida Muslim leader is disputing claims by the Rev. Terry Jones that he brokered a deal to get the Islamic center project near New York’s ground zero moved if the pastor called off his Quran burning event.
Imam Muhammad Musri said Jones may have hatched the story about the Islamic center moving to “give himself a reason to call this off.”
Jones “was trying to save face,” Musri said Thursday night on CNN’s “AC360.”
Musri said he did not tell Jones that the Islamic center project would be moved away from ground zero.
‘He’s accusing me of lying to him, which I did not. I was very explicit with him.” said Musri, who is with the Islamic Society of Central Florida.
…
Mr Jones, of the Dove Center, says he’s proceeding with his plans. I suspect that’s because another lunatic group in the US, the Westboro Baptist Church and its leader Fred Phelps, have said they’d burn Qurans if Jones didn’t. Why whip up so much media attention only to have someone else steal the glory at the last minute, right?
Do we really need to ask whether a publicity-seeking pastor in Florida is smart? Of course he isn’t. He is making a political statement. In the US, political statements are protected by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution, so long as they do not incite immediate violence at the place they are made. (And yes, under US law, an action can be a statement, particularly when it’s political. Burning the American flag, for instance, is a protected political statement.)
Everyone under the sun is condemning this pastor’s intended action, excepting those few who agree with him that his incoherent statement needs to be made.
The Washington Post, for example, carries this piece reporting that even Evangelical Christian clerics are trying to get this guy, Terry Jones, to change his mind:
Evangelical leaders try to reach out to the pastor who plans to burn the Koran
Arab News reports that international political and religious leaders, including the Pope, think poorly of the pastor’s plans:
The paper further editorializes on A wicked plan. The piece correctly notes that Mr Jones no more represents Christianity than Al-Qaeda represents Islam. The piece errs, though, in thinking that there must be some law to prevent him from going ahead. Other than a local ordinance forbidding open fires without a license—which the local government refuses to give him—there is no law to stop him. That law cannot be used preemptively to stop him, in fact, it can only punish him after the fact. The editorial notes that Mr Jones’ action could lead to the loss of life. Unless it appears that violence will erupt in the place he intends his act, imminently, there is no law to stop him. Immediately incitement of violence is one of the few exception to the right of free speech. Incitement of violence a few thousand miles away does not overcome that barrier.
I read many pieces that seek to make the equation that two wrongs do equal a right. If Muslims can be insulting by seeking to build 51Park, then Jones can be insulting by burning Qurans. That is and always has been nonsense. I say that because I do not think those opposing 51Park have any moral justification, beyond raw emotion, for their views. The do have freedom to express those views, of course. They do not have the freedom to squelch others’ 1st Amendment freedom of religion through the force of law. Equally, no one has the freedom to squelch Jones’ 1st Amendment freedom of speech.
As I had noted earlier, I thought the initial decision to build 51Park (then to be called ‘Cordoba House’) to be a mistake. Instead of quiet, rational argument against it, however, opponents to that plan turned the issue into something beyond just an unwise decision. They turned it into a plebiscite on Islam, actually, a plebiscite that confounded Islamic extremism with all of Islam. That, I believe, is an issue worth the digging in of heels.
Mr Jones is free to dig in his heels over his plan. That does not stop me or others from considering him to be an idiot and a very poor example of Christianity.
GAINESVILLE – The minister of a Florida church said he has canceled plans to burn copies of the Quran because the leader of a much-opposed plan to build an Islamic Center near ground zero has agreed to move its location. The agreement couldn’t be immediately confirmed.
The Rev. Terry Jones said Thursday that Americans oppose the mosque being built at the location and that Muslims do not want the Quran burned. He said instead of his plan to burn the books on Saturday to mark the ninth anniversary of 9/11, he will be flying to New York to speak to Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf about moving the mosque.
“We are, of course, now against any other group burning Qurans,” Jones said during a news conference. We would right now ask no one to burn Qurans. We are absolutely strong on that. It is not the time to do it.”
However, a Florida imam says no deal has been reached to move the site of a mosque near ground zero in exchange for a Florida minister to call off plans to burn Qurans.
Imam Muhammad Musri tells The Associated Press that what he offered was a meeting among the Rev. Terry Jones, the New York imam planning the Islamic center and himself to talk about the mosque location.
Musri is president of the Islamic Society of Central Florida. He says he told Jones that he does not believe the mosque should be built near the World Trade Center site and would do everything in his power to make sure it is moved.
Jones says he believes a deal was reached to move the mosque and would fly to New York Saturday to discuss it.
…
The above story is running in my newspaper. If it is correct in its details, it is both good and bad. Good in that no one will be burning Qurans this weekend. Bad in that it sets a horrible example that blackmail does pay off. I wonder, though, whether any deal has actually been reached. My reading of the article leads me to believe that Mohammed Musri, president of the Islamic Society of Central Florida, has promised more than he can deliver, never mind whether he should deliver.
Arab Media & Society has an interesting and useful study by Chiara Bernardi, a PhD Student at the Department of Applied Social Science, London Metropolitan University. She looks at how and where Saudi female bloggers (for the most part) assess ‘women’s issues’ and where that assessment overlaps the assessments by International Governmental Organizations (IGOs). She finds that while there is some overlap, there are also major differences.
It has been my perception since at least 2001 that the ‘women’s issues’ that Saudi women find important is different from with what international organizations believe to be important. The international organizations tend to follow a Western feminist trajectory, focusing—when they look at Saudi Arabia at all—on education and divorce. Saudi women agree on those two points, but far more seriously. They differ, though, when it comes to issues like the abaya, gender segregation, male guardianship, stoning, and honor killings, issues that simply don’t show up in the IGO lists. Not surprisingly, though, the issues that Saudi women identify are recognized by regional NGOs.
You can download the full report here [15-page PDF document]. I recommend you do!
Saudi bloggers, women’s issues and NGOs
Chiara BernardiThis paper examines how women’s issues in Saudi Arabia have been articulated in several parts of cyberspace and how they have been ‘rendered public’ (this research will use the term ‘public-ise’ as defined by Noortje Marres1) by Saudi women’s blogs, news media outlets and regional or international organizations that cover women’s issues .
In particular, it will analyze how women’s issues in Saudi Arabia are articulated on social media platforms that fall under the Web 2.0 umbrella, and see if and how those same issues are comparably articulated by non-governmental organizations (NGOs), international government organizations (IGOs), and media outlets.
This paper does not aim to analyze whether the Internet is a catalyst for policy-making changes or only another tool activated through human interaction. Instead it aims to investigate how certain controversies (issue language, issue formation in cyberspace and network formation around the issue: ‘women’s issues in Saudi Arabia’) are articulated and developed through Web 2.0 platforms, namely blogs and other tools (YouTube, RSS feeds, Diggit).
…
Abu Dhabi’s The National reports on a Saudi TV program, ‘Khawatir’, broadcast over the MBC satellite channel, that seeks to instill Islamic values in contemporary society. Those values are not those of the scholars who debate the nature of the jinn or what constitutes an adequate wudu. Instead, they appear to be things like personal responsibility and an individual’s responsibility to his neighbors. According to the article, the program is having an effect, even among children. More programs like these would be a healthful counter to the ‘Islamic’ shows that currently dominate the airwaves.
TV show that gets people thinking
Haneen DajaniABU DHABI // Prince Faisal bin Abdullah took off his besht and began sweeping the floor of a classroom alongside some students.
The Saudi minister of education was trying to set an example, not leaving any rubbish behind, while launching a competition for the team with the cleanest desks.
The students asked for increasingly outrageous prizes for the winning team, from an iPhone to a 2010 Lexus with massaging seats. “This is Khawatir, not Oprah,” joked Ahmad al Shugairy, the host of the most talked about show in Ramadan that was filming events.
Khawatir, or Thoughts, an annual 10-minute segment airing on MBC1 and now in its sixth year, aims to revive Islamic concepts and achievements.
…
While many Saudis appear to believe that a woman’s place is in the home—preferably pregnant with male offspring—others think women actually have a role to play in the business world. Thus, as Gulf News reports, the Saudi Ministry of Labor is continuing its efforts to have women work as cashiers in supermarkets.
I’m mystified by arguments that having women work in this capacity is haram. Women certainly worked in the markets in the time of the Prophet, and ever since. You can go to various market stalls (or blankets) in any of the souks of major cities and find them operated by Bedouin women. Does the fact that this is not haram suggest that the practice is, actually, fine? Or might it be a perception that Bedouin women are somehow less than human, thus exempt from Islamic principles? I’m pleased to see the Ministry of Labor standing up to the troglodytes.
Saudi ministry undeterred by Islamist threats
Saudi Ministry of Labour to continue issuing work permits to women to work as cashiers in shopping centres
Abdul Rahman ShaheenRiyadh: The Saudi Ministry of Labour has made it clear that it would continue issuing work permits to women to work as cashiers in shopping centres and would not be deterred by Islamist threats to boycott shops that employ women.
The experiment of employing Saudi women as cashiers has been implemented for the first time in leading shopping centres in Jeddah and the Eastern Province,” Deputy Minister of Labour Dr Abdul Wahid Al Humaid said in a statement published on Sunday by Al Riyadh newspaper.
However, the controversial experiment has not been tried in Riyadh and Qassim.
Al Humaid urged the people to cooperate with the efforts of the ministry to find employment for women as this is one of the limited opportunities available for the employment of women.
…
The Washington Post runs this article from the Associated Press on how Saudi authorities are starting to act on last month’s edict that only authorized religious bodies would be permitted to issue fatawa. The article also notes that authorities are starting to crack down on ‘fatwa-by-SMS/text message’.
I do think that the Saudi government is correct in trying to impose some level of control over messages that confuse people, that promote an Islam that is contrary to the mainstream beliefs (even Saudi mainstream beliefs) about Islam. I do acknowledge the potential danger of having only limited channels empowered to speak on Islam, that only one interpretation is being put forth. But I wonder if the task isn’t, as something I read recently stated, ‘Chasing squirrels with a bulldozer’. It’s effective when you catch one, but the catching is pretty hard. Only the slowest, least nimble get caught. The Internet, if nothing else, is very nimble, if one knows how to avoid blockage.
Saudi telecom shuts websites violating Fatwa edict
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Saudi Arabia’s telecom regulator has shut down three websites that were violating a government decree limiting the issuance of religious edicts to the country’s most senior group of clerics, authorities said Saturday.
Saad al-Shihri, an official at the Saudi Communications and Information Technology Commission, said the regulator began blocking the websites on Wednesday. He said authorities also have drawn up a list of clerics whose services break the decree, and that they have been sent messages “warning them to comply.”
…
Economist has a brief review of a new book on pop culture in the Islamic world and how much it is influenced by American pop culture. Some, I’m sure, see this as ‘cultural imperialism’. I think rather that its a choice to use a foreign medium to put for new visions of existing culture.
Five Things: The Sheikh’s Batmobile
LIBYANS sing along to Lionel Richie’s “Hello”, Iranians jam to Django Reinhardt, and Indonesian teenagers favour the post-punk stylings of Wire, a British cult band. Who knew? Richard Poplak, for one. Mr Poplak is the author of “The Sheikh’s Batmobile: In Pursuit of American Pop Culture in the Muslim World”, a tour through 17 Muslim countries in search of local interpretations of American culture, from cheesy reality television to Metallica. The chapters are organised by country—Libya, Indonesia, Lebanon, Iran, Afghanistan, etc—with each section prefaced by religious statistics and venerated local pop-culture icons. The result is packed with surprises, five of which More Intelligent Life has chosen to highlight.
The Economist writer highlights the following:
On heavy metal
On video games as propaganda
On vanity
On punk rock in unexpected corners
On Palestinian video games
There is certainly tension between Saudi Arabia and Iran, even if the Saudis aren’t tense enough to grant Israel overflight rights, as alleged several times over the past year. Those tensions affect the United States, both in terms of regional security and energy security. Anthony Cordesman, who holds the Burke Chairs in Strategy, Saudi Arabia & the Gulf, and Middle East Energy & Security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) offers his views:
The New Saudi Arms Deal
Serving Vital US Security Interests
Anthony H. CordesmanOne of the most critical strategic decisions the US will have to make over the next few years is how to reshape its security posture in the Gulf and the Middle East as it fully withdraws from Iraq. There is no possible “end state” to the US presence in the Gulf, or an end to the need for the strongest possible US security ties to friendly states in the region.
…
Another take on the issue, from Space Daily:
Here’s an article from Long War Journal, republished at Military.com, noting that one of the leaders of Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is trying to recruit Saudi military to the organization. This isn’t anything particularly new. Intelligence officials—Saudi and others—have known for years that extremists have tried to subvert people in the Saudi armed forces and National Guard. They’ve had minor success, that is, they’ve found a few people, but none to carry out a major terrorist operation.
What is perhaps new is that the speaker, Said al Shihri, went through the Saudi rehabilitation program for extremists. He clearly managed to ‘graduate’, but failed to absorb the lessons.
Ex-Detainee Tries to Woo Saudi Soldiers
Thomas JoscelynIn a nearly 15-minute audio tape released in early August, Said al Shihri, one of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula’s (AQAP) top leaders, tried to convince Saudi soldiers and security officers to serve al Qaeda. Al Shihri set forth a dozen reasons why Saudi citizens should betray the royals, and he offered a cursory plan for doing so.
Al Shihri said it should be “easy” to overthrow the House of Saud if his plan is followed.
Al Shihri called for willing recruits to form cells that can attract logistical support from members of the Saudi Air Force, Army, and office of the Interior Ministry. Al Shihri urged guards for the Saudi royals to turn on “the tyrant princes” and “kill them.” Those in charge of security at “weapons warehouses” inside the Kingdom and employees of the Interior Ministry are especially valuable recruits, al Shihri said.
…
Thanks to reader Lori for the pointer!