Talk about half a loaf! In this commentary for Asharq Alawsat, Dr. Aaidh al-Qarni, a popular Saudi preacher, calls for the end of conflict between Sunnis and Shi’as. That’s great! But he gives as his principle reason why this is good the ‘reason’ that by doing so it would help confront ‘World Zionism’! Perhaps after he settles the conflict between Shi’a and Sunni, he can start doing his homework on Zionism…

A Word to the Wise in the Islamic Community
Dr. Aaidh al-Qarni

Since we have not been able to resolve the centuries-old dispute between the Sunnis and the Shias, we have to admit that the dispute exists and that it is our duty not to transform it into a bloody conflict.

The Community of Islam has suffered enough wounds, painful divisions, and calamities. World Zionism is lying in wait for us and scheming to uproot us. What is the use of resurrecting insults, vituperation, defamation, and instigation? What is the use of arousing animosities and highlighting the faults and defects of the two sects? What is hoped to be achieved from shedding the blood or a Sunni or a Shia? Both the Sunni and Shiite sects believe that their sect is the correct one and that the other is false.

One cannot change the convictions of people even if they are invalid. We the Sunnis believe that our path is the correct one. If the Shias believe that we have been remiss and have not done everything we should toward Ahl al-Bayt [The Prophet's Household] we proclaim strongly and frankly that we seek God’s protection from anyone that has belittled the stature of Ahl al-Baytor that has insulted them. At the same time, we ask the Shias to stop belittling, insulting, and finding fault with the Companions of the Prophet. The defense of Ahl al-Bayt and the prophet’s companions is the duty of every single male and female Muslim.
…

Interesting editorial in Arab News on Islamophobia. It’s topical as the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has taken that theme as one of its major focuses. While this editorial makes some good points, it also shows some weaknesses. Not everything that offends Muslims is a manifestation of hatred of Muslims. The Danish cartoons, I contend, was not Islamophobic, but rather intended to show that the hypersensitivity of some Muslims toward any comment or criticism was having an effect on Danes and their own freedoms.

The piece is most useful, though, in reminding Muslims that they need to watch themselves for Christophobia and ‘Jewophobia’ (i.e., anti-Semitism). The tenor and volume of these has gone a long way in creating the animus toward Islam that many in the West do feel.

Editorial: Defeating Islamophobia

The news that the US has appointed an observer to the Organization of the Islamic Conference probably shocked many Muslims. After all, the general view across much of the Muslim world is that the US is riddled with Islamophobia. Many will therefore question Washington’s intentions, seeing the appointment not a move “to promote mutual understanding between the US and Muslim communities”, as the Americans claimed, but rather a deception, simply to pretend that is the case.

It is a sad fact that Islamophobia is growing worldwide — and the meeting of Muslim foreign ministers in Senegal this week prior to the current Islamic summit was right to warn of the surge of prejudice and bigotry against Islam. It is there in the outrageous Danish cartoons; it is there in the planned Dutch film attacking the Qur’an; it is there in firebomb attacks against Turks in Germany; it is there on attacks on mosques. But while Islamophobia is on the rise and thus rightly a key issue for the summit, it is not rampaging across the non-Muslim world. The foreign ministers themselves pointed it out on Tuesday. The Muslim world, they said, is “confronted by hatred and bigotry of radical marginal groups who believe that it is only through insulting Muslims and their religious symbols that they can demonstrate their commitment to freedom of speech”. The key word there is “marginal”. The gratuitously insulting film being planned in the Netherlands is not the doing of the Dutch government nor in tune with Dutch public sentiment. It is the work of a far-right member of Parliament who hopes that by stirring up trouble he can gain political power. But if the Dutch were genuinely anti-Muslim they would vote the far right into government rather than swing against it as they did in the last election.
…

There’s an interesting article in the current issue of The Economist that, while possibly off-putting to many Muslims, should nevertheless be read. It deals with pig slaughtering in Romania and how it runs counter to ‘enlightened’ views of many in the EU community. The piece is useful because it a) shows that traditional behaviors are not quickly changed; b) criticisms of traditions are not aimed solely at Muslims; and c) tradition and religion are often mixed together.

The issue of slaughtering animals for traditional or religious purposes is one that pops up frequently. Whether it’s Brigitte Bardot militating against the slaughter of sheep for ‘Eid Al-Adha (and turning her concerns into an anti-Muslim rant) or PETA complaints against Kosher slaughter, urban societies in the West are perhaps a step-too-far removed from the reality of food production. They tend to prefer that what they eat come neatly wrapped in plastic, with not much linkage to the animal from which it comes.

According to this piece, Romanians slaughter pigs at their homes both traditionally and as part of their celebration of Christmas. Over 1.5 million pigs will be slaughtered this year, primarily in non-urban settings. The methodology of slaughter is the issue at hand. The EU, which Romania has recently joined, requires ‘humane’ techniques be used that minimize animal distress. Many assume that the only way to achieve that is by ensuring that the animal is unconscious before slaughter. That’s not necessarily the case, however, as this piece by Temple Grandin, of Colorado State University spells out.

The Romanians are not ready to give up their traditions simply because others tell them they are barbaric if they do elsewise. Similarly, Muslims—including Saudis—are not about to do away with practices that have worked successfully for over 1,400 years just because those practices offend outsiders. Calling them names for sticking with their traditions isn’t going to speed up any process of change.

The article points out that the Romanians will likely change their practice over time because they will see advantages in doing so. They will be able to decouple the religious aspect of their practice from the traditional. What is religious will remain; what is simple culture is open to being changed.

Saudis and other Muslims will not drop their religion. They will, however, be able to change what are merely cultural interpretations of their religion from what are the core religious values. This pertains not to just animal slaughter (where I suspect very little will change), but to many practices such as stoning, amputations, and grotesque punishments as we see levied in cases like ‘Qatif Girl’.

A dissertation on Romanian pork
Sometimes it is better not to apply the full rigour of European rules

THERE are two reasons why Romanian farmers face an anxious first Christmas in the European Union. One involves a lot of money; the other how to kill pigs. Revealingly, the biggest grumbling is about the pigs.

But first the money. The European Commission is threatening to hold back some €180m ($260m) in farm and rural-aid payments if the Romanian authorities miss a mid-December deadline for setting up anti-fraud controls. So far, ordinary Romanians are not up in arms about this. It helps that most commentators blame the government for the fiasco.

The second threat is more explosive. It involves persistent suggestions that the EU’s animal-welfare rules may stop Romanians from slaughtering pigs for Christmas in their backyards. This tradition survived even the dark, kill-joy years of communism. As their first Euro-Christmas approaches, Romanian officials are expressing hopes that the feared Brussels crackdown will not happen. They have warned the commission that messing around with Christmas would be the quickest way to poison Romanians’ rather perky attitude to the EU.
…

The Washington Post and The New York Times have two pieces that should be read together, both concerning the formation of public schools in the US. One is an Arabic-oriented school in New York; the other, a Hebrew-oriented school in Florida.

In the first piece, it’s rather startling to find Daniel Pipes lining up along side the most conservative of the Saudi ulema in his fear about the ‘corrupting influence’ of foreign languages! Leaning a foreign language does, necessarily, involve learning about the culture beneath it. Thus, to learn Arabic is to learn about Arab culture. And yes, it is true that much of Arab culture is commingled with Islam. To learn about Islam is not to be converted to Islam, however. To fear new information, though, is xenophobia in its purest form. Good job, Pipes!

In New York, a Word Starts a Fire
Arabic Educator’s Brief Defense of ‘Intifada’ T-Shirts Makes Her a Target
Robin Shulman

NEW YORK — The goals were clear when Sheneen Jackson enrolled her son in one of the first public schools in the nation to focus on Arabic language and culture. First, her 11-year-old would master Arabic. Later, doors would open for him in government and diplomacy — maybe a job at the United Nations, international travel, the prospect of contributing to Middle East peace.

Instead, Jackson discovered that the distrust and tension that infuse many Middle East issues had tainted the Brooklyn middle school.

“It’s unfortunate, but I know a lot of people in New York are sensitive,” Jackson, 33, a Verizon technician, said of the controversy over the school. “That’s the whole premise of the school.”

…Daniel Pipes, a pro-Israel conservative who created Campus Watch, a Web site dedicated to exposing alleged bias in university Middle East-studies programs, wrote in the New York Sun that the school would cause problems because “learning Arabic in [and] of itself promotes an Islamic outlook.”
…

Hebrew Charter School Spurs Dispute in Florida
ABBY GOODNOUGH

HOLLYWOOD, Fla., Aug. 23 — The new public school at 2620 Hollywood Boulevard stands out despite its plain gray facade. Called the Ben Gamla Charter School, it is run by an Orthodox rabbi, serves kosher lunches and concentrates on teaching Hebrew.

About 400 students started classes at Ben Gamla this week amid caustic debate over whether a public school can teach Hebrew without touching Judaism and the unconstitutional side of the church-state divide. The conflict intensified Wednesday, when the Broward County School Board ordered Ben Gamla to suspend Hebrew lessons because its curriculum — the third proposed by the school — referred to a Web site that mentioned religion.

Opponents say that it is impossible to teach Hebrew — and aspects of Jewish culture — outside a religious context, and that Ben Gamla, billed as the nation’s first Hebrew-English charter school, violates one of its paramount legal and political boundaries.
…

Both pieces are actually about the anxiety Americans feel when it comes to drawing the line between religion and the state. Because both of the subject schools are state schools, the dividing lines takes on constitutional issues because the state is forbidden to promote one religion over any other. For some, that means that schools cannot address the issue of religion in any manner. For others, it’s that it is fine for schools to address religion, as long as that religion is their own. A different religion? Well, that’s not acceptable and it may even be threatening. Both of the stories about the schools report fear of the other, juiced up with a lot of bigoted commentary. Do read both articles together.

The Italian news agency Adnkronos International (AKI) runs an interesting piece on the rise of Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, and anti-gay attitudes in Europe. The article is correct, I believe, in grouping these forms of behavior as they all point to an increased fear of ‘the other’, those who behave or look different from the majority.

I can’t say, though, that I’m in favor of the legal proposals being offered to address the problem. ‘Hate crime’ is a troubling concept. It seeks to penalize thoughts that may lie behind particular behavior. If there is not freedom of thought—even odious thought—then the very foundation of ‘freedom’ is being challenged. I think it better to severely punish the behavior, criminal in itself, rather than to seek to enhance punishment based on what people think.

Europe: Islamophobia and anti-Semitism on the rise

Rome, 20 August(AKI) - Responding to a survey suggesting hate crimes against Muslims and Jews in Europe are on the rise, amidst the indifference of authorities, a leading representative of Italy’s Jewish community has agreed with the findings, but said that state-sponsored dialogue between Jews and Muslims in Italy has helped to contain the problem there.

“The anti-Semitism that affects the Jewish community today is different than the one before World War II; it is not religious anti-Judaism of a racist nature but more often we experience aggression from Islamic communities in Germany, France and Belgium”, Riccardo Pacifici, deputy president of Rome’s Jewish community said in a newspaper interview published Monday.

“Italy is a country where there is more dialogue; in Milan, but above all in Rome, thanks to the efforts of those who govern”, Pacifici was quoted as saying by Rome-based daily Il Messaggero.

Still, he admitted that most contacts - championed, he said, by Rome mayor Walter Veltroni, and by the Italian capital’s chief rabbi, Riccardo Di Segni who in March 2006 visited Rome’s main mosque, Europe’s largest - occur at a leadership level.

“We can’t say that this dialogue exists amongst ordinary citizens… and it must be said that [the dialogue at leadership level] takes place because of the fear and suspicion that exist in our community”, Pacifici said.

He was commenting on the the 2007 Hate Crimes Survey by US-based watchdog, Human Rights First, which showed increasing intolerance towards the Jews, Muslims and homosexuals in Europe.
…

As noted here back in 2005, the Saudi government’s desire to promote conservative Islam through the global distribution of books has not worked to its favor. Too often, the books—printed and distributed at government expense, if not always commissioned by the government—have been found to promote not just conservative Islam, but radically intolerant Islam. This has led to the denunciation of the books, and the Saudi government, in many countries and through many media outlets.

This article from Saudi Gazette suggests that the government is now acting on an awareness of the problem. By bringing in group of international Muslim scholars to work on a project to develop new books, it can change the way the world sees both the Saudi government and Islam. If nothing else, it will help both to avoid the bashing they receive from Islamophobic and Anti-Saudi audiences.

Crown Prince Backs Islamic Books Project

Crown Prince Sultan Bin Abdul Aziz, the Deputy Premier, Defense and Aviation Minister and Inspector General, has donated a grand sum of SR5.6 million for the “International books on Islam and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia” project.

“The project aims to help better the understanding of our Western friends to sensitive religious topics, like the wearing of the hijab, and to show them that the Islamic religion is concerned primarily with peace,” stated Dr. Badr Kureyem, supervisor general of the project, at a press conference on Monday.

Since the September 9/11 attacks, the religion of Islam has been regarded by the Western World with a mix of fear and suspicion.

…”We have a team of 73 researchers working on the project, coming from all over the world. We will definitely be able to make a big impact on Western public opinion”, affirmed Dr. Mohammed Al-Bishr.

Sayyed Wild Abah’s Asharq Alawsat commentary on Islamophobia is a bit of a mess. To start with, he takes Edward Said’s criticism of how the West sees Islam seriously. Said, in both Covering Islam and Orientalism was very selective in choosing examples to make his point—cherry-picking, as they say. Next, Abah throws around terms like ‘neoconservative’, ‘Britcon’, and ‘nouveaux philosophes’ without actually providing a useful definition. He seems to assume that we all know what he means by those terms. He also inches perilously close to anti-Semitism where he feels compelled to note the religion of critics of Islam.

I think he misses the mark in trying to find the origins of Islamophobia. Nevertheless, the piece reaches some correct conclusions about its extent. I suggest he look at a combination of ignorance and fear (sometimes coupled with out-and-out racism) for the real sources. Do read the entire piece, though.

New Wave of Islamophobia in the West
Sayyed Wild Abah

In the 1970s, Edward Said had observed that the unfavorable image of Islam in the West had shifted from being solely discussed and perpetuated within academia to becoming inherent in popular Western culture. He highlighted the main features of this phenomenon in his book “Covering Islam: How the Media and the Experts Determine How We See the Rest of the World,” which was not received with the same popularity as his other, more renowned book, “Orientalism.”

What this observation suggests is that the discipline of Orientalism, which was only developed during the 19th century, had systematically and cognitively come to an end under mounting pressure from epistemological standards for human sciences. The latter having radically shaped the way religious texts were read and classified, as well as the historical and anthropological dimensions of the phenomenon of holiness.

These narrow perceptions of Islam, which were mostly derived from medieval residue of religious conflicts, were thereby replaced with more moderate approaches that analyzed Islam according to its different semantic and symbolic contexts.

This cognitive shift had resulted in an increasing schism in the West between Islam as studied in academia on the one hand, and the Islam perpetuated in the media, in which stereotypes and misconceptions prevail due to the tragic state of affairs in the Islamic world, on the other. This was only further cemented by the 9/11 attacks, which made Islam a focal point of contemporary Western media.

What we wish to note, however, is that these negative stereotypes appear to be surrounded by three main political groups: neoconservatives in the United States, the Blitcons, as Ziauddin Sardar first referred to them, or the British literary neoconservatives in the UK, and finally French leftist intellectuals from the “nouveaux philosophes[New Philosophers]” group who have recently decided to switch alliances and support the new right-wing President Nicolas Sarkozy.
…

Ensuring Criticism of Israel Does Not Slide Into Anti-Semitism
Sir Cyril Townsend, Arab News

For many years I have been surprised by the level of anti-Semitism I have encountered in the Arab world. Put simply, the dislike of Israel (shown in a recent international poll to be the most unpopular country in the world) spills over among the unthinking into a dislike of all Jews worldwide. The best cure is to meet the many Jews who are anti-Zionist, most of whom had a contempt for Ariel Sharon’s government in all its extreme and eccentric aspects as strong as my own, and who were deeply shocked by Israel’s behavior in Lebanon last summer.

In the middle of March a row occurred at the University of Leeds over the subject of “Islamic anti-Semitism”, which was the title of a lecture to be given by a German academic. A Dr. Matthias Küntzel arrived at that Northern University to start a three-day program of lectures and seminars. He has lectured on that subject around the world. He is just back from giving a talk at Yale University.

He is no stranger to either politics or controversial issues having been an adviser to the Green Party in Germany. He is employed as a research associate at the Vidal Sassoon International Center at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Dr. Küntzel gave Leeds University’s German Department, which had invited him, the subject for his main lecture some three weeks in advance:

“Hitler’s Legacy: Islamic anti-Semitism in the Middle East”.

The Department hoped it might attract a considerable audience….

It’s good that this op-ed is appearing in a Saudi paper. It would have been better had it appeared in a Saudi Arabic language paper. But at least the message is getting some coverage. What’s also useful is what Inayat Bunglawala, Assistant General Secretary of the Muslim Council in Britain said to The Jewish Chronicle:

“Muslim communities must take more responsibility to ensure that criticism of some of Israel’s policies does not slide into a kind of a casual anti-Semitism. Perhaps the best way to encourage this vigilance is to ensure that grassroots ties prosper between our communities.”

Voices of Jewish Dissent Break Cover
Neil Berry

Many Muslims are outraged by the tendency, now so prevalent in the Western media, to assume that Muslims form a single homogenous group and speak with a single voice. They are perhaps especially outraged when Jews make this assumption. Yet Muslims are capable of making a similarly facile assumption about Jews, imagining that they are all Zionists with a blind loyalty to the State of Israel and an implacable hatred of Islam.

The Zionist establishment does not seem to mind if simplistic views of Jewish opinion are held by Muslims, or indeed by the world at large. There are, however, not a few Jews in Britain and elsewhere who are appalled at the thought of being thus stereotyped. It is out of deepening unease about the way the Zionist establishment has sought to monopolize representation of Jewish opinion that a group of prominent British Jews has founded an organization called Independent Jewish Voices. The aim of the new body, which was launched in London last week with full-page advertisements in the Guardian, the Times and the Jewish Chronicle, is to offer a counterweight to the official Zionist line propagated by the Board of Deputies of British Jews. More than 100 well-known Jews have signed the group’s founding declaration, the central message of which is: “Those who claim to speak on behalf of Jews in Britain consistently put the support for an occupying power above the human rights of the occupied people.” The dissenters include such intellectual and artistic luminaries as the historian Eric Hobsbawm, the playwrights Harold Pinter and Mike Leigh, the actress Zoe Wanamaker and the comedian Stephen Fry.

Interesting article in Arab News decrying the stereotyping of Jews—as well as that of Muslims. The piece notes (usefully, for Saudi readers) that not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists support all Israeli policies. While this will certainly not end Saudi antisemitism, it moves the discussion a bit in the right direction. We can be grateful for that, though it would have been better to see this piece in the Arabic language media.

Saudi diplomat slams Holocaust denial
HILARY LEILA KRIEGER

In stark contrast to Iran’s promotion of Holocaust denial, Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the US Turki Al-Faisal attended a Capitol Hill reception condemning anti-Semitism on Wednesday, and one of his diplomats told The Jerusalem Post the Holocaust was a “horrible” episode.

Agreeing to speak to an Israeli newspaper, Saudi diplomatic official Jamal Khashoggi, who accompanied Al-Faisal to the event, told the Post that the Holocaust is a “historical fact. It did happen.”

Jewish officials hosting the function also noted the presence of the ambassadors of Bahrain, Jordan, Morocco and Tunisia, and a lower-level official from the Egyptian Embassy.

In discussing the Saudi presence at the reception, Khashoggi said, “It should be a known fact that the Arabs never had a problem with anti-Semitism, but we need to state that over and over again.”

…”Saudi Arabia, until now, has been very oblivious and insensitive to issues of anti-Semitism,” said Jess Hordes, Washington director of the Anti-Defamation League, who pointed to Saudi dissemination of anti-Semitic propaganda in schools. “That a Saudi ambassador would be at an event recognizing the fight against anti-Semitism has the potential to be important.” He added, however, that “the key is what they do internally.”

…”The tie between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism is very clear, and coming to an event that is fighting anti-Semitism is tantamount to coming to an event that is fighting anti-Zionism,” said the reception’s host, William Daroff, director of the United Jewish Communities’ Washington office, who couldn’t recall seeing the Saudi ambassador at a similar function. “Coming to this event is a step forward.”

Very interesting piece from the Israeli Jerusalem Post. I think, though, that some of the statements reported in it are pretty incoherent.

Contra the hopes of Jamal Khashoggi, Saudi Arabia certainly does have a problem with antisemitism. And Mr. Daroff of the UJC blurs reality when he tries to minimize the difference between antisemitism and anti-Zionism. That line of thought is the one that equates the two, making any criticism of Zionism into a criticism of Judaism and therefore antisemitic. But he is right that it’s an important step that the Saudi Ambassador, along with those from some other Arab Muslims states at this function, is a needed step forward.

The Nauseating Holocaust Conference
Sir Cyril Townsend, Arab News

There are certain things in life that should never happen — but they do! In this category I put the nauseating conference that Iran has just staged, for two days in a northern superb of its capital, on the Holocaust.

The world’s historians agree, apart from a tiny minority that includes some with a political agenda, that 6 million Jews, and other disfavored groups such as Poles and gypsies, were murdered by the Nazi regime in Germany during the Second World War.

In Europe, in America and in Israel there are museums that go into this mass murder in very great detail. Individuals who so died have had their names and particulars carefully recorded. Individuals who survived the concentration camps have been interviewed at length. Countless books have been written, films made and television documentaries shown. What made this mass killing so repellent was that industrial and scientific methods were employed by the Nazis to achieve their gruesome strategic aims. Rounding up and killing such a number of fellow humans is not an easy task, and bodies and belongings have to be disposed of. To deny the Holocaust ever took place is like telling the Japanese that Hiroshima was not the first target of the atomic bomb on Aug. 6, 1945.

I don’t think we really know why President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wanted to stage such a despicable event, although numerous reasons have been stated officially. It was an affront to the suffering of mankind. It received mass condemnation from continent to continent.

I would have preferred to have seen this article coming from a Saudi pen, but its appearance in a Saudi newspaper has some significance. Saudi Arabia has a serious problem with Antisemitism. It’s of the ignorant sort, based on rumor, poor education, politicians who seek to distract the public, and preachers who don’t know what they’re talking about.

There are foreign Jews in Saudi Arabia, both in diplomatic positions and as expatriate workers. The Saudis who know them like them as much as they like anyone else. Many are surprised to learn that someone is a Jew, somehow seeming to expect a creature with horns. But a survey of the attitudes of young, school-age Saudis toward Jews a couple of years ago was distressing. The kids parroted all the antisemitic slurs they had heard and read. Perhaps by running article like this one the Saudi media can start working to rid itself of the occasional lapses that allow outrageous materials to appear on their pages.

Thank You, Cousins

Thank You, Cousins [2]

by Randall B. Hamud

Arab News runs this story over two days. It’s the tale of Osama Awadallah, a Muslim-Arab who immigrated to the United States from Jordan in 1999. Born in Venezuela and reared in Jordan, he is the son of naturalized US citizens. He came to the States to further his education and become a citizen.

He was arrested in Sept., 2001 and has been in custody and in various trials until late last month, when he was finally acquitted. The writer started out as Awadallah’s attorney, but as the case become more complex, other lawyers were brought in. Hamud notes that the majority of these lawyers were Jewish and went to extraordinary lengths to see that justice was done.

The story is interesting enough in its own right. Even more interesting, though, is that the Saudi Arab News sees fit to run a two-day story about Jews helping an Arab. That’s a pretty big step, I think, toward humanizing Jews, who are often vilified in popular media and textbooks.