Sun. 15 May. 2011
MIDEAST WEB
Ø Bashar Assad and the mysterious west …………………..…1
WASHINGTON POST
Ø Residents fleeing Syrian town tell of arrests, terror…………2
JERUSALEM POST
Ø Ayalon: Majority of the UN is against Israel ……………….4
GUARDIAN
Ø A Marshall plan for the Middle East?...... 5
Ø Why I blew the whistle about Palestine…………………..…8
Ø Gaddafi is hoping that a 'dignified' exit will halt air strikes..11
TODAY’S ZAMAN
Ø On the Arab spring…………………………………………13
HOME PAGE
Bashar Assad and the mysterious west
Ami Isseroff
MidEast Web Views,
05/14/2011
Sometimes it is the West, and not the East, that is inscrutable. The revolts against tyrannical regimes that took place in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Syria, Yemen and Bahrain are at least understandable. It would also be understandable if the revolts were subverted by Islamists, or if Western powers were to quash the revolts out of fear of Islamism, or protect their favorite rulers.
But the outcome of the revolts, which is mostly determined outside the Middle East, does not seem to conform to any logic. In Egypt and Tunisia Western allied rulers were forced to flee. Yemen and Bahrain also appear to be headed for a change of government. Only two brutal dictatorships have put down their revolts and escaped virtually all criticism: Iran and Syria, Iran has been quietly and methodically killing dissidents for a long time, nobody knows or cares it seems. In Syria, Bashar Assad's regime has murdered about a thousand people. In Syria, the "new Middle East" looks depressingly like the old one for those Western journalists who bother to look, but nobody is looking. The media hardly write about Syria, the U.N. has made no resolutions against Syrian rights violations. In Iran likewise, repression continues unhindered. On the other hand, in Egypt, the one ruler who had any affinity to the US was forced to leave office. Moubarak was no democrat, but he compared favorably with Bashar Assad. The message for tyrants is clear - don't choose the U.S. as an ally.
Can anyone explain the impunity of Bashar Assad and the Iranian Mullahs? Does it serve anyone's interest? Is there any reason why Hosni Moubarak should have been deposed, but Bashar Assad and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are not? Is there a reason why nobody is interested in the massacres that take place every day in Syria??
HOME PAGE
Residents fleeing Syrian town tell of arrests, terror
By The Washington Post,
Sunday, May 15,
DAMASCUS, Syria — In the two-month-long uprising against Syrian authorities, the southern town of Daraa has been at the heart of the unrest, and the inspiration for many other Syrians as protests have spread across the country.
But Daraa’s defiance has come with a cost: Civilians who have fled the town in the past week described scenes of terror, with arbitrary detentions and snipers on rooftops.
One young man, Mohammed, said he walked 13 miles through forests Tuesday to evade capture after his parents were arrested by security forces. He feared that if he did not leave Daraa, he would be next.
Protesters say they are rising up against the government of President Bashar al-Assad to bring democratic rule to Syria after decades of autocracy. The government claims it is being besieged by “terrorists,” and last week state television aired several “confessions” by detained Daraa residents.
In a shift, officials on Friday conceded that some protesters have legitimate demands and are demonstrating peacefully, and the government has said it will begin a process of “national dialogue.” The government also said it has pulled its troops from Daraa. That move is being watched closely as a potential change in strategy after weeks of increasingly violent tactics that appeared to do little to dampen protesters’ willingness to take to the streets.
Mohammed’s problems began when he was caught taking video footage of soldiers who had been patrolling the city. The soldiers took Mohammed’s identification card, he said, and several days later authorities showed up at his home.
“They said that if I keep quiet and they hear nothing about me for the next four days, then they will release my mother from prison,” said Mohammed, who, like others, spoke on the condition that his last name not be published because he fears the consequences of speaking out. “If my name comes up, they said they will kill her.” Mohammed said he does not know where his parents are being held.
Already, he said, thousands of people from Daraa and the surrounding area have been detained — an assertion that has also been made by human rights groups. “They are holding them in schools and in the main stadium in the city,” he said. “No one has been allowed to go to mosques to pray for weeks.”
Mohammad said that his family is well-regarded and has influence in the area. “But in this situation, it no longer counts,” he said.
Another Daraa resident, Noor, said she left her studies in Damascus and returned home to Daraa to see her family when violence began, but fled the town five weeks ago. “I went down but ran away the next day. It was a Friday and people were being shot in front of me,” said Noor. “There were bodies lying on the streets.”
A Sunni Muslim dressed in the latest Western style, Noor displayed cellphone video taken from her house of security officers using sticks to carry out mock beatings in a neighborhood of Damascus.
Videos apparently recorded in Daraa show far more horrific scenes. The clips show homes that have been torched, and cars flattened by tanks. The content of the videos, and the accounts of witnesses, could not be independently verified, but they are consistent with the claims of human rights groups who have documented the violence in Daraa.
Marwan, a student from Daraa, has also recently fled the town for Damascus.
“The security came to my family’s house looking for me last week. My father told them I was in Beirut studying. They came after me because my sister’s friend was arrested and he gave my name as being his friend,” he said. He is now hiding out among friends in the Syrian capital.
Amer, a 22-year-old law student from Daraa, said he does not know whether to be hopeful or despairing about the path his country has taken. “We wish we had the situation in Libya. At least they have some feeling of freedom,” he said. “We are afraid. But I think there is no way back now.”
HOME PAGE
Ayalon: Majority of the UN is against Israel
Deputy FM says Israel is unlikely to stop UN vote on Palestinian statehood, but that decision will not be binding.
Jerusalem Post,
15/05/2011
Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said on Sunday that Israel is trying to convince 60-70 countries to oppose a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood in the UN in September.
"We want to stop the battle on this decision, which doesn't have any legal validity," Ayalon told Israel Radio. "There is an automatic majority against Israel in the UN, and we can't change it, but the Security Council is the body that counts."
Ayalon added that the unity deal between Fatah and Hamas blocked most of Israel's diplomatic options.
"We have to wait and see what happens on the Palestinian side," he said.
At a Tel Aviv University event last week, Ayalon said that Israel is powerless to prevent the Palestinian initiative to seek statehood.
"Israel will no succeed to prevent recognition of a Palestinian state in the [UN] General Assembly, driven by an automatic Arab majority," Ayalon said in a speech at Tel Aviv University.
"But such a decision will not be taken in the Security Council," he added, "where there is a majority of responsible countries."
Regarding the responsibility of other countries to the peace process, Ayalon said that the United State, Russia, the European Union and several other countries are all obligated by the Oslo Accords, which demand a diplomatic process involving dialogue.
HOME PAGE
A Marshall plan for the Middle East?
The US once reached out to change Germany's status from enemy to ally. A similar strategy is now worth considering
Jocelyne Cesari,
Guardian,
14 May 2011,
The recent demise of Osama Bin Laden marks a turning point for American foreign policy, as it has occurred at a time of unprecedented changes in the Middle East. It offers the opportunity to open a new phase and to consider a Marshall plan for the Middle East.
The Marshall plan was a decisive tool for the US and its allies to rebuild Europe after the second world war. The economic and political conditions now are different to what they were back in 1945, of course: the US is not at war with Muslim countries, and the damages of the "war on terror" are not comparable to post-war devastation. It is also improbable that today's fragile US economy can undertake a financial commitment similar to billions offered by the Marshall plan between 1948 and 1951. In these circumstances, financial aid to Muslim countries should differentiate between wealthy states and those in genuine need. It should also request from their rulers accountability and transparency on the use of the funds.
But more than economic aid, the Marshall plan was a communication strategy that emphasised Germany's importance within the community of Western nations and changed its status from enemy to ally through the discursive change with Europe, and especially Germany. This strategy could be replicated within the context of the Arab spring.
Since 9/11, the "war on terror" has dominated international relations and especially the relations between the US and Muslim countries – not only through direct American presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also through global monitoring of radical activism. Such a policy has tainted the image of the US among Muslims, even in friendly countries such as Turkey. In a survey published by the Pew Global Attitudes Project in 2010, only 17% of the population viewed the US favourably.
More recently, in April 2011, Pew research found that 79% of Egyptians hold an unfavourable view of the US. Thus, while the majority of Muslims also reject al-Qaida and global jihad, the current US strategy does not portray its shared interest in defeating global jihad. In fact, over the past decade, Muslims outside and increasingly inside the west doubt the sincerity of the US war on terror and believe it to be a war against Islam.
Such a rift between Muslim populations and the west urges a reconsideration of the current strategy of the war on terror.
The Arab spring is the most efficient antidote to the political strategy of al-Qaida because from Tunis to Cairo, the social revolts had their basis in demands for more freedom, justice and redistribution of power – not jihadi activism. It was the first time, since at least 1967, that political grievances were not phrased in terms of the kind of politicised Islam on which al-Qaida has thrived.
Even Islamist parties are shifting the focus of their political narratives away from Islamic topics, as reflected in the civil platform of the political party, Freedom and Justice, recently created by the Muslim Brotherhood. It is therefore the right timing for the west to send a clear message of support to the fight against autocratic regimes. Harry Truman's words of 1947 strikingly resonate in the current context of uprisings from Syria to Yemen and Libya: "I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures."
This discursive shift will mean coming to terms with the "clash of civilisations" discourse that has deeply affected the relationship with Muslim countries. Concretely, it means accepting regimes that may be led by Islamist parties provided they respect democratic principles. Americans and Europeans must insist upon the will of the majority, free institutions, representative government, free elections, guarantees of individual liberty, freedom of speech and religion and freedom from political oppression in relations with the Middle East. Truman insisted that these were principles of "western civilisation"; today, these should be recognised as principles for all nations of the international community and be supported as such.
The obstacles to such a strategy are numerous within countries where radical activism remains an option – and, externally, from states such as Saudi Arabia, Iran and Israel, which will disapprove of such a realignment of western policy. Moreover, the struggle against radical activism should continue, but the war strategy must be integrated into a broader, more inclusive narrative and diplomatic effort.
It may be realistically argued that such an approach would sacrifice western interests in the name of principles, but others respond that committing to these principles will serve western interests. In his well-received Cairo speech of 2009, Obama called for partnership "based upon mutual interest and mutual respect", emphasising the "truth that America and Islam are not exclusive".
Moreover, Obama highlighted common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and human dignity. A reiteration of these principles could be the building block to implementing such a Marshall plan.
HOME PAGE
Why I blew the whistle about Palestine
Israel's attack on Gaza and the disastrous 'peace talks' compelled me to leak what I knew
Ziyad Clot,
Guardian
14 May 2011,
In Palestine, the time has come for national reconciliation. On the eve of the 63rd commemoration of the Nakba – the uprooting of Palestinians that accompanied the creation of Israel in 1948 – this is a long-awaited and hopeful moment. Earlier this year the release by al-Jazeera and the Guardian of 1,600 documents related to the so-called peace process caused deep consternation among Palestinians and in the Arab world. Covering more than 10 years of talks (from 1999 to 2010) between Israel and the PLO, the Palestine papers illustrated the tragic consequences of an inequitable and destructive political process which had been based on the assumption that the Palestinians could in effect negotiate their rights and achieve self-determination while enduring the hardship of the Israeli occupation.