Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
July 19, 2005

The Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) is distributing the enclosed articles to build bridges of understanding between the West and the Arab World and countries with predominately Muslim populations.

Partners in Humanity also regularly publishes the work of student leaders and journalists whose articles strengthen intercultural understanding and promote constructive perspectives and dialogue in their own communities through its Youth Views column.

Unless otherwise noted, all copyright permissions have been obtained and the articles may be reproduced by any news outlet or publication free of charge. If publishing, please acknowledge both the original source and CGNews, and notify us at cgnewspih@sfcg.org.

**********

ARTICLES IN THIS EDITION:

1. "Kurdish expectations will test Assad" by Bashdar Ismaeel
Bashdar Ismaeel, a freelance writer on Middle Eastern politics, who lives in the United Kingdom, looks at the Kurdish question in Syria in light of the relative success of Iraqi Kurds in the recent elections and the possibility that the Kurds would collaborate with the United States. Ismaeel feels that Syria's mishandling of this issue could affect "domestic stability and the country's long-term prosperity" and highlights the U.S. role in this situation.
(Source: Daily Star, July 11, 2005)

2. "In unity of purpose" Jordan Times Editorial
This editorial in the Jordan Times publicizes "King Abdullah's challenge to reclaim Islam from the misguided forces that have used it with malicious intent." Perhaps belying popular opinion, imams, grand ayatollahs, clerics and Muslim scholars from various schools of Islam have signed this challenge, which, the author claims, aims primarily to "call to order the issuance of arbitrary 'fatwas' by religious or militant groups against Muslims and non-Muslims alike."
Source: Jordan Times, July 7, 2005

3. "A Statement Regarding Muslim-Christian Perspectives on the Nuclear Weapons Danger" from the Pocantico Conference Center of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund
This statement denouncing nuclear weapons from a recent conference of Muslim, Christian and other religious leaders and scholars demonstrates the common respect they have for the sanctity of human life by arguing for a ban on nuclear weapons and respect for the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
(Source: Pocantico Conference Center of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, May 23-25, 2005)

4. "Bin Ladenism Removes Turkey from Europe and Prevents a Meeting of Cultures" by Khaled el-Hroub
Khaled el-Hroub, Visiting Fellow-Centre for Middle Eastern & Islamic Studies
University of Cambridge, returns to the topic of Turkey and integration into the EU, this time considering the subject in the light of Islamic extremism and the "clash of civilizations."
(Source: Al-Hayat, July 4, 2005)

5. "When the sound of dialogue is louder than the explosion of bombs" by Joanna Cattanach
Joanna Cattanach, a graduate student at Baylor University in USA studying International Journalism with a focus on Middle East and Latin America, finds something in common with a Lebanese immigrant - deep frustration with the irrationality of extremist politics and violence.
(Source: CGNews-PiH Youth Views, July 19, 2005)

**********

ARTICLE 1
Kurdish expectations will test Assad
Bashdar Ismaeel

More than ever, the Syrian regime is feeling the heat of U.S. foreign policy choices and of the changing strategic situation in the Middle East. Domestically, the matter of Syria's disenfranchised Kurds has risen to the top of the agenda, with the community showing growing confidence. The importance of the Kurdish question was particularly evident at the recent Baath Party conference, when participants agreed to address the demands of the discriminated-against Kurds. The regime of President Bashar Assad knows that the Kurds, if they choose to collaborate with the policies of the United States, can seriously threaten the regime's authority.

Under Assad, Syria has seen the introduction of some economic reforms and a modest, though sporadic, loosening of political controls, even as genuine and broad liberalization has yet to materialize. While the Baath conference promised to resolve the issue of the stateless Kurds, estimated at 150,000-200,000 from a total Syrian Kurdish population of some 1.5 million, there remains a possibility that little real change will occur, at least not enough to fend off Syrian Kurdish pressures against the Baath regime, or those of the hawks in the Bush administration.

The matter of Syria's Kurds has long been overshadowed by the fate of their brethren in Turkey and Iraq. However, in a constantly shifting Middle Eastern political landscape, this is now beginning to change; Syrian Kurds are in the spotlight largely because of the example of the Kurds in Iraq. Free from the grip of Saddam Hussein and thanks to years of self-rule and prosperity, Iraq's Kurds have gained a new prominence. They became virtual kingmakers after the Iraqi elections in January - which also allowed for the election of a Kurdish regional Parliament - before seeing one of their own, Jalal Talabani, named as Iraq's president.

Meanwhile, Syrian Kurds continue to face decades-long restrictions, including on the use of their language. Since the advent of Law 93 of 1962, the Syrian government has classified some 160,000 Kurds as ajanib, or foreigners. They cannot vote, own property or work in government jobs. Another 75,000 or so are simply unregistered, and are known as maktoumeen, or "concealed," having almost no civil rights. Syria had for some time sought to form an "Arab belt" between its Kurds and those in Iraq and Turkey, mindful of the cross-border influence between the communities. However, this desire was considerably undermined by the influence of Kurds from Iraq, so the Syrian Kurds are today increasingly feeling encouraged to demand more rights.

Since Kurdish rioting broke out in Qamishli in March 2004 at a football match, the atmosphere in north-eastern Syria has been tense. The mood was little improved after rioting again broke out in Aleppo last month, following the news that an outspoken Kurdish cleric, Maashouq al-Haznawi, had been killed. The Kurds blamed the Syrian government, which denied any involvement. Following the forced Syrian troop withdrawal from Lebanon after the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, and amid intense international pressure, this was hardly a welcome addition to Assad's agenda.

The United States sees Syria today as an obstacle to its vision of democracy and change in the Middle East. Damascus has come to realize the potential seriousness of the new situation across the border in Iraq and has tried to act quickly by responding to Kurdish demands for change. The Baath conference did promise to redress the Kurds' situation, but was not specific about a time frame and numbers. The question is whether, on the back of this, the Kurds, who are no longer fearful of the Syrian state and who can plainly see Syria's current isolation, will not demand more, perhaps using both political and military means in doing so.

It has come as no surprise, then, that Massoud Barzani, the head of the Kurdish Democratic Party in Iraq and the new president of the Iraqi Kurdish entity, within days of taking power, voiced concerns and support for the Syrian Kurds. Yet he also demanded that their rights be granted peacefully and through dialogue.

The Syrian regime is slowly realizing that successfully tackling the Kurdish problem is crucial for domestic stability and the country's long-term prosperity. If unchecked, the developing situation regarding the Kurds has the potential to provoke a severe backlash. Will Bashar Assad's regime be able to lower Kurdish expectations and dodge another bullet?
###
* Bashdar Ismaeel is a freelance writer on Middle Eastern politics, who lives in the United Kingdom. He wrote this commentary for the Daily Star.
Source: The Daily Star, July 11, 2005
Visit the Daily Star, www.dailystar.com.lb
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********
ARTICLE 2
In unity of purpose
Jordan Times Editorial

The statement issued yesterday by the International Islamic conference (IIC) at the conclusion of its Amman meeting is an endorsement from the Muslim world's major religious figures of His Majesty King Abdullah's challenge to reclaim Islam from the misguided forces that have used it with malicious intent.

The statement aimed first and foremost to call to order the issuance of arbitrary "fatwas" by religious or militant groups against Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Guided by the fatwas of the attending imams, grand ayatollahs, clerics and Muslim scholars, and inspired by King Abdullah's challenges to the conference participants, the IIC's statement addressed some of the most poignant issues facing Muslims today.

In reaffirming the unity of belief and purpose among all the Islamic schools of jurisprudence and rejecting outright any attempt to declare any of the true and faithful adherents of these schools apostates, the statement's signatories make clear that Islam is not to be held hostage by the slate of maledictions of derelict groups and organisations.

The signatories also concur that what unites the eight Islamic schools of jurisprudence, and their schools of thought and sects, is much more profound than what divides them. By institutionalising the method of issuing religious fatwas and offering an ijtihad, the Muslim world would be able once again to open up "Bab Al ijtihad" ushering in once again enlightened and progressive interpretation and thought.

King Abdullah's challenge to the conference serves as a force that mobilises and gives a voice to the silent majority of Muslims who are weary of the damage being inflicted on their faith.

That the religious leaders and scholars have taken up the King's challenge lends tremendous support to the majority of Islam's adherents - a moderate and pious community that has been so wrongly offended.

As the signatories to the statement return home, their communities will be looking for more deliberations on the other complex issues discussed during the conference, including the rights of women, terrorism and various socio-economic ills.

The conference is the beginning of a process that must continue in order to bring the silent majority to the fore in today's Muslim world.

###
* This article was written as the editorial piece for the Jordan Times.
Source: Jordan Times, July 7, 2005.
Visit the Jordan Times, www.jordantimes.com
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********
ARTICLE 3
A Statement Regarding Muslim-Christian Perspectives on the Nuclear Weapons Danger
Pocantico Conference Center of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund

A group of religious leaders and scholars, Muslims, Christians and others, was convened by the Islamic Society of North America, the Managing the Atom Project of the Kennedy School of Government of Harvard University, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and the Churches Cnter for Theology and Public Policy. The group met at the Pocantico Conference Center of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund in Tarrytown, New York on May 23-25, 2005, to discuss what their traditions had to contribute to the question of the nuclear weapons danger at this time in history. The consultation produced the following statement, which religious leaders of all faiths are urged to endorse:

We affirm our belief in the One God, the Creator and Sustainer of the universe.

We agree that the Christian and Muslim traditions are unambiguous on the sanctity of human life and on the protection of all forms of creation, including the environment. We believe in the dignity of all human beings and their roles as trustees and humble custodians of the earth and their responsibility for the needs of future generations.

We believe that chemical, biological and particularly nuclear weapons do not discriminate between combatants and non-combatants and inevitably destroy innocent human life, even as they destroy other forms of life such as animals and vegetation, cause irrevocable damage to the environment for many generations to come and cause human suffering and disease. Therefore, we hold that these weapons are contrary to our religious and ethical principles.

We agree that the ideal response to the nuclear threat is a total and universal ban on all such weapons, including low yield tactical nuclear weapons, their development, production, possession, acquisition, deployment, use, and the threat of use. We hold further that any weakening of the nuclear "Non-Proliferation Treaty" is a setback for world peace.

We agree that all nations, without exception, must abide by international treaties, agreements and other international covenants of which they are signatories.

We further agree that the possession of nuclear weapons is an unacceptable risk for the human community in these times and is a continuing threat to the entire planet and its fragile ecosystem. The risk of theft of nuclear weapons or materials by non-state actors for nuclear terrorism as well as the continuing risk of accidental use of nuclear weapons by nation states themselves makes even the possession of nuclear weapons a danger to God's creation.

We agree that the enormous resources spent on nuclear weapons can be put to much better use to deal with the problems of poverty, disease and ignorance and to promote a peaceful pluralistic civil society, free of hate and prejudice.

We encourage engagement on the part of civil society in the debate and policy making decisions relating to nuclear weapons.

We therefore believe that the common position held by both of our traditions, expressed as the sanctity of human life, leads us inexorably to say that the only real security for the world and the most responsible position for people of faith in our two traditions is to call upon the United States and other countries of the world to, gradually and in a verifiable manner, finally eliminate these weapons from the face of the earth.

Endorsed by these participants:

Asma Afsaruddin, Muslim
Associate Professor, Dept. of Arabic & Islamic Studies, University of
Notre Dame & Chair of the CSID Board of Directors

Sadida Athaullah, Muslim
Woodbridge, Virginia

Dr. Jamal Badawi, Muslim
Islamic Society of North America

Mohamed Elsanousi, Muslim
Director of Communications and Community Outreach, Islamic Society of
North America

Muneer Fareed, Muslim
Associate Professor, Dept. of Near Eastern & Asian Studies, Wayne State
University

Rev. Barbara Green, Presbyterian
Executive Director, Churches' Center for Theology and Public Policy

Rabia Terri Harris, Muslim
Coordinator, Muslim Peace Fellowship

Sherman Jackson, Muslim
Professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies, Dept. of Near Eastern Studies
University of Michigan

Rev. Richard Killmer, Presbyterian
Program Director, Churches' Center for Theology and Public Policy

Ibrahim M. Abdil-Mu'id Ramey
Director of the Disarmament Program, Fellowship of Reconciliation

Anna Rhee, United Methodist
Board of Directors, Churches' Center for Theology and Public Policy

Dr. Louay Safi
Executive Director, Islamic Society of North America

Muhammad Shafiq, PhD
Imam/Executive Director, Islamic Center of Rochester, NY and Executive Director, Center for Interfaith Studies and Dialogue, Nazareth College, Rochester

Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi
Chairman, Fiqh Council of North America

Bishop Walter F. Sullivan, Roman Catholic
President of the Board of the Churches' Center for Theology and Public Policy

Rev. Dr. Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite, United Church of Christ
President and Professor of Theology, Chicago Theological Seminary

Joe Volk, Religious Society of Friends
Executive Secretary, Friends Committee on National Legislation

Dr. Jim Walsh
Executive Director, Managing the Atom, John F. Kennedy School of
Government, Harvard University

Peter Weiderud, Church of Sweden
Director, Commission of the Churches on International Affairs, World
Council of Churches

Dr. Christine Wing, Presbyterian
Member of South Presbyterian Church, Dobbs Ferry, NY

This statement reflects the views of the signatories and not necessarily those of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Organizations are listed for identification purposes only.

Religious leaders of all faiths are encouraged to endorse this statement. Those of other faiths have joined with their Muslim and
Christian brothers and sisters in affirming the sanctity of human life and the need to eliminate nuclear weapons. Religious leaders may endorse by sending an email to info@nrdi.org
###
* This statement resulted from the recent conference at the Pocanticio Conference Center.
Source: Pocantico Conference Center of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, May 23-25, 2005.
Visit Nuclear Reduction Disarmament Initiative for People of Faith, www.nrdi.org
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********
ARTICLE 4
Bin Ladenism Removes Turkey from Europe and Prevents a Meeting of Cultures
Khaled el-Hroub

The rich western debate in recent years about the idea of Turkey joining the European Union has theoretically swung toward cautious acceptance, or at least risking the move. The opinions of opponents to this step are well known. Turkey still has a way to go before it meets the conditions of membership, such as economic growth, per capita income, and the human rights situation, particularly regarding the Kurds and prison conditions. The most important of these topics, the "ghost" that is hidden at times and discussed openly at others, is Islam in Turkey. The conservative trend in Europe, represented by extremist right-wing parties, whether Christian or quasi-fascist, is staunchly opposed to "polluting" the Christian-ness, European-ness, or "whiteness" of Europe. Meanwhile, the rational European trend, a mix of liberals, leftists, socialists and cosmopolitans, has taken a progressive, humanitarian position, based on Europe's interest in seeing Turkey join and the interest of the future relationship between the West and Islam and Muslims in general. If Muslim Turkey joins Christian Europe as a full member, it would be the most important historical act taken during the last few centuries against the logic of the class of civilizations. It would break down and dissolve the bloodiest borders, to use Samuel Huntington's phrase and create common interests in belonging to a single space.

The Europeanization of Muslim Turkey would also bring about a deeper reconciliation between the concepts of social and political modernization and constitute the most important experience in terms of the relationship between modern Islam and the weight of western modernization.

The negotiations between the EU and Turkey have been led by the Latter's modernist, Islamist trend, and Islamic critics on the right and left have had a field day in criticizing Turkey's move to join at the expense of its "Islamic identity." This promising development now appears to have collapsed or been delayed until further notice, after the French and the Dutch recently rejected the proposed EU Constitution.
###
* Khaled el-Hroub is a visiting fellow at the Centre for Middle Eastern & Islamic Studies University of Cambridge.
Source: Al Hayat, July 4, 2005.
Visit Al Hayat, english.daralhayat.com
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********
ARTICLE 5 - Youth Views
When the sound of dialogue is louder than the explosion of bombs
Joanna Cattanach

A StoryCorps sound booth opened this week at the site of the World Trade Center in New York City. The booth is part of the planned memorial complex at the World Trade Center site. The booth allows victims, survivors, and rescuers of Sept. 11 to record their thoughts in hour-long testimonials that recall that day of horror and shock.

After Sept. 11, Americans asked themselves: why do they hate us?

At the time we didn't know who they were.

Even now I doubt many do. Some Americans still believe the Sept. 11 terrorists were Iraqi. And the Bush administration has done little to dissuade Americans of this notion.

The violence committed in London and Madrid was as much a message to the US as it was to Britain and Spain. And it's the same message that's been passed along in every assassination of newly elected leaders in Iraq, in kidnappings and beheadings, suicide blasts and videotaped messages from Al-Qaeda.

President Bush told the world, "You're either with us or against us..." Al-Qaeda has declared the same.

I tried to explain my frustration to a Lebanese immigrant working in the US.

He was shocked. Frustrated being an American? Laughable. Try being a Muslim, dealing with the INS, and working in an office full of flag-waving Republicans. Worse, try being a faithful Muslim forced to watch fanatics take your religion and use it to justify killing people; "On many occasions, they made me question my faith but sometimes I say, I want to be stronger than them."

So do I. I do not feel guilty for being an American. I have education, opportunity, and social freedoms that would not be granted to me in most of the countries in the Middle East. But I am tired of living in a country that is the target of every terrorist with a cause and access to explosives.

Nothing will make terrorism against the US stop, not even the withdrawal of troops from Iraq tomorrow.

True, he argued, but the US has supported Israel for years. It was the US, he said, that vetoed condemnation against Israeli actions in Lebanon. He said, "I still remember to this day the Qana massacre of 1996, and in the face of the whole world's outrage, [Sec. of State Madeleine] Albright was the only one to say no." The United States was the only country, besides Israel, which voted against a formal condemnation by the UN General Assembly, although, as often happens when controversial resolutions are voted on, many countries abstained from the vote.

The Qana massacre in southern Lebanon took the lives of over 200 Muslim refugees in a ten-day offensive led by Israelis. The slaughter of innocent men, women, and children shocked the Middle East. But as Robert Frisk reported, the blame was once again laid not only on Israel but on the US as well. Americans were "dogs."

I told him the US is not out to "get" the Middle East.

No, he said, only re-shape it. The attacks against the US were wrong but some in the Middle East believe they were justified to counter the neo-colonialist efforts.

And thus is born the tautology of self-sustaining violence.

This same rationalization is used by Israel, the US, and other allies. Attacks against one country will be met with proportionate, or even disproportionate, responses. Thousands of Americans died on Sept. 11. What did the world expect the US to do? Accept its "punishment"? Everything that ails the Middle East is laid at the feet of the US. Where does our responsibility end? In this world of global superpowers where nuclear weapons exist and global terrorism threatens every country, might makes right, and mighty countries will act regardless of world public opinion.

The Bush Administration decided to democratize Iraq. The US ousted Saddam Hussein and the decision to do so has been met with harsh criticism abroad and at home. It is difficult to ask for greater dialogue and increased understanding from the Middle East when the government that represents me, even without my vote, enacts a foreign policy abroad that is, I believe, flawed.

The Bush Administration severely underestimated the impact of involvement in Iraq, inadequately armored equipment, underestimated the number of troops needed in Iraq and Afghanistan, isolated allies, lied about WMDs in Iraq, and convinced the American people this would be a low-impact war for "freedom." Freedom from what though? Terrorism exists because of actions committed in the past and the present. In as much as the US seeks to destroy terrorism, in many ways the US created it. And there is no freedom from that.

It is frustrating to see the US government act in a way that will ensure increased violence against the US and its allies for years to come and maddening to live in a country that is held responsible for everything that ails the Middle East.

My Lebanese counterpart agreed, "I am being hijacked by fanatics. You are being hijacked by politicians." If we better understand one another one day we may stop this infuriating cycle of violence and discontent. He continued, "[There] should be a mutual understanding. Drop the labels Terrorist Evil Doers on one end and Great Satan Infidels on the other."

As families and survivors record their sad stories of disbelief and painful memory in a sound booth in New York City, I wonder what the world sound booth would record. Where would we put it? London? Madrid? Baghdad? Tehran? Beirut? Would we listen to what others said? Could an American and an Iraqi insurgent talk with one another? Could we learn from each other? Accept responsibility? Exact forgiveness? Change? Or would our shared frustration, hate, and ignorance be recorded worldwide?
###
* Joanna Cattanach is a graduate student at Baylor University in USA studying International Journalism with a focus on Middle East and Latin America, who has been writing about the Middle East for the last six years.
Source: CGNews-PiH Youth Views, July 19, 2005
Visit Search for Common Ground and CGNews at www.sfcg.org
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********
The Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity, brought to you by Search for Common Ground, seeks to build bridges of understanding between the West and the Arab World and countries with predominately Muslim populations. This service is one outcome of a set of working meetings held in partnership with His Royal Highness Prince El Hassan bin Talal in June 2003.

Every two weeks, CGNews-PiH will distribute 2-5 news articles, op-eds, features, and analyses that aid in developing and analyzing the current and future relationship of the West and Arab/Muslim world. Articles will be chosen based on accuracy, balance, and their ability to improve understanding and communication across borders and regions. They will also reflect the need for constructive dialogue around issues of global importance. Selections will be authored by local and international experts and leaders who will analyze and discuss a broad range of relevant issues. We invite you to submit any articles you feel are compatible with the goals of this news service.

We look forward to hearing from you, and welcome any questions, concerns, or comments you may have about this service. Please forward this message to colleagues and friends who may also wish to subscribe to the service. To subscribe, send an email to subscribe-cgnewspih@sfcg.org with subscribe in the subject line.

If you are a member of the media, please join us in promoting constructive dialogue to improve understanding and perceptions. Unless otherwise noted, all copyright permissions have been obtained and the articles may be reproduced by any news outlet or publication free of charge. If you choose to republish any of the articles, please acknowledge both the original source and CGNews, and notify us at cgnewspih@sfcg.org

The views expressed in these articles are those of the authors, not of CGNews or its affiliates.

Common Ground News Service
1601 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Suite #200
Washington, DC 20009 USA
Ph: +1(202) 777-2207
Fax: +1(202) 232-6718

Rue Belliard 205 bte 13
B-1040 Brussels, Belgium
Ph: +32 (02) 736-7262
Fax: +32(02) 732-3033

E-mail: cgnewspih@sfcg.org
Website: http://www.commongroundnews.org

Editors:
Emad Khalil
Amman Editor

Oussama Safa & Juliette Schmidt
Beirut Editors

Elyte Baykun
Washington Editor

Michael Shipler
Youth Views Editor

**********
This is a not-for-profit list serve.

Please feel free to forward this message to anyone you think would like to see these articles.

To subscribe, send an email to subscribe-cgnewspih@sfcg.org with subscribe in the subject line.

Posted by Evelin at July 20, 2005 03:47 AM