Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
November 29, 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. 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-PiH, and notify us at cgnewspih@sfcg.org.

**********

ARTICLES IN THIS EDITION:
1. “Women crucial in better East-West Relations” by Jason Erb and Noha Bakr
In this fourth article in a a series of views on "The Role of Women in US-Muslim Relations", Jason Erb and Noha Bakr, International Affairs Representatives for Quaker Service-AFSC in Amman, Jordan, consider the role of women in building cultures of peace. Noting that women bring different issues and dialogue strategies to the peace table - “putting communities and families back together, providing healing and recovery services and organising solidarity networks across ethnic, class and cultural chasms” - they underline their vital role in bringing “civilizations” together.
(Source: CGNews-PiH, November 29, 2005)

2. “Ways of Dialogue With the Other” by Khaled Batarfi
Khaled Batarfi, a Saudi journalist, describes what happens when he introduces a conservative friend to his “diwania” (weekly gathering) and to the diverse views held by its members – “liberals and Islamists, those who belonged to the left or the right, and those, like myself, of the middle.” Through this story he identifies the challenges of dialogue, how many people are unused to conversing about sensitive topics and unable to separate the person from the topic. Batarfi suggests that through basic guidelines, such as respecting the person and their right to speak their mind, even if you disrespect their position,” people can learn to dialogue and interact with the other “not by force, not with hate, disrespect and dissidence.”
(Source: Arab News, November 13, 2005)

3. “Bulliet on Islamo-Christian Civilization” by Sonia Nettnin
U.S. Journalist, Sonia Nettnin, discusses how in his new book, The Case for Islamo-Christian Civilization, Richard W. Bulliet looks at the complicated composition of civilizations, particularly the joint history which unites people within them. He makes his case for an Islamo-Christian Civilization to the Western reader when he writes, “During a typical morning a person takes a shower with a hard bar of soap. He drinks coffee with sugar in a glazed cup. While he reads the newspaper he has orange juice in a transparent glass. Later in the day he may eat pasta. If he works in a medical profession he may play chess, backgammon or cards (if he has time). The point is that all of these items – including the medical profession - derive from the Islamic world.”
(Source: Amin.org, November 21, 2005)

4. “Tolerance in Islam” by Lily Zakiya Munir
Concerned about the growing intolerance in Islam in Indonesian, Lily Zakiyah Munir, Director of the Center for Pesantren and Democracy Studies (CEPDES), Jombang, stresses “the importance of a contextual approach in interpreting the Koran. Any text, including Koranic text, speaks through its readers.” She points to the example of absolute religious freedom in Madineh under the Prophet Muhammad and urges readers to consider the history of diversity and pluralism that has existed for so long in Indonesia.
(Source: Jakarta Post, November 23 2005)

5. “What is the best way for Arab media to talk peace?” by Mohammad Gohar
Mohammad Gohar, CEO of Video Cairo Sat, argues that “[m]ass media in the Middle East, and the broadcast sector in particular, stand the greatest chance of helping bridge the gap of understanding and repair some of the damage caused by decades of agenda-laden, biased media platforms.” Looking at issues such as financing and political support for peace initiatives, Gohar introduces a number of steps that, if taken, may enable mass media to serve this bridging function.
(Source: CGNews, November 22, 2005)

**********

ARTICLE 1
Women crucial in better East-West Relations
Jason Erb and Noha Bakr

Amman - Samuel Huntington's 1993 "Clash of Civilisations" depicts a world in which fundamental cultural differences form the basis of conflict between Muslims and the West. Current events seem to bear out his warnings, as the US wages its Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism (a.k.a. the Global War on Terror or, less favourably among some, the War on Islam) and Muslim perceptions of the United States sink to new lows.

Despite headline-grabbing news of conflict between the West and the Muslim world, there are fundamentally positive cultural commonalities between these two imaginary realms, such as the inviolability of life, tolerance for differences and aversion to war. One of the most promising ways of tapping the commonalities is the movement called Culture of Peace. If Huntington has correctly diagnosed the problem - which many doubt - then supporters of Culture of Peace are working to advance a solution.

Culture of Peace is an international program that promotes education, democracy, socio-economic development, equality and human rights. Culture of Peace is "a set of values, attitudes, modes of behavior and ways of life that reject violence and prevent conflicts by tackling their root causes to solve problems through dialogue and negotiation among individuals, groups and nations." Culture of Peace does not deny that differences exist but offers ways to manage differences so they do not lead to violent conflict.

Women in many societies experiencing, or at risk from, conflict are at the forefront of efforts to rebuild the social fabric that allows for the coexistence of different ethnic, religious or social groups. Consciously or not, they are promoting cultures of peace. As Elisabeth Rehn and Ellen Sirleaf, authors of the United Nations Development Fund for Women's (UNIFEM’s) global study Women, War and Peace wrote: “Women were taking risks in every place we visited. They were putting communities and families back together, providing healing and recovery services and organising solidarity networks across ethnic, class and cultural chasms. Through women, we saw alternative ways of organising security and of building peace.”

While the majority of people killed in conflict are men, women are particularly vulnerable to the violence of war, and are often left to rebuild shattered families, communities and societies. They bear the brunt of male fighters' trauma through the increased domestic violence, alcohol abuse and psychological shock that often accompany demobilisation. But their efforts at promoting coexistence are often underestimated or ignored, especially when serious political negotiations begin. Despite strong UN resolutions supporting the role of women in peace-building, such as UN resolution 1325 on women and conflict, they still suffer discrimination in this field. An October 2005 report from the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue notes that "Of the senior conflict mediators involved in today’s peace processes, hardly any are women."

That is not to say that women are simply victims of conflict or passive recipients of policies. Women often also play a fundamental role in waging war, whether as supporters of policies that sustain conflict, in support of combat operations or even as fighters engaged in warfare. But the impact of conflict on women is generally disproportionate to that of men, and they often bring different issues and dialogue strategies to the peace table.

Women play an essential role in showing the human cost of conflict and in promoting better East-West relations. The international community can develop this underused resource by providing more funds in greater recognition of women involved in people-to-people diplomacy. This can be done through capacity-enhancement of women’s peace-building initiatives; commissioning better studies on the social impact of war-induced, post-traumatic stress disorder; and supporting exchanges of women who have lost the primary breadwinner in their families to conflicts involving some combination of the West and the Muslim world. Women make up an estimated 57.8% of the global primary school workforce, and governments and international bodies in the Western and Muslim worlds can do more to promote Culture of Peace materials in primary and secondary schools to help foster tolerance and conflict resolution skills among the young.

The under-representation of women in peace-building and conflict negotiations is a lost opportunity. To avoid making Huntington's “clash” scenario a self-fulfilling prophecy, the international community needs to put more resources and support behind women working towards a culture of peace both in the West and in the Muslim world. As Dr. Theo-Ben Gurirab, acting president of the Security Council when Resolution 1325 was unanimously passed, said, “Women are half of every community … Are they, therefore, not also half of every solution?”

###
*Jason Erb and Noha Bakr are International Affairs Representatives for Quaker Service-AFSC and are currently based in Amman, Jordan. Quaker Service-AFSC is an international peacebuilding and development organization that includes people of different faiths that seeks to promote reconciliation, sustainable development and non-violence.
Source: This article is part of a series of views on "The Role of Women in US-Muslim Relations", published in partnership with the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) and United Press International (UPI).
Visit the website at www.commongroundnews.org
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 2
Ways of Dialogue With the Other
Khaled Batarfi

Jeddah - Once I asked Abdullah, my young conservative friend, to join me in a “diwania” (weekly gathering). He was surprised to find people with diverse views among my friends. There were liberals and Islamists, those who belonged to the left or the right, and those, like myself, of the middle.

We talked and discussed. After heated discussions someone cracked a joke and we all laughed. On the dinner table we seemed to have forgotten our differences altogether. Abdullah couldn’t understand this. On our way back, he was thinking and pondering. Finally he asked: “How could you all be friends? How could you discuss divisive issues like curriculum change, roots of terrorism, minority and women rights, extremism, the attitude of youngsters, and joining the World Trade Organization and not get angry with each other? Early in the evening I thought you hated each other. One camp was almost shouting at the other. Then some of you came to an agreement. Others were whispering in the ears of the people they disagreed with earlier. And then you all joked and laughed like nothing happened. I might not understand, but please try explaining, anyway.”

I tried. I told him that in Islamic civilization, as in any other, people have not only the right but also the obligation to a free debate on all issues of concern to some or all. Since heated debates do cause fractions, dislike and anger, golden rules were set. They are almost alike everywhere. Basically, you express yourself as you wish, as long as you don’t insult the personal feelings of others. Talk about public issues as strongly as you like but never go personal with your opponents. Even if you disrespect his position, respect his person, and his/her right to speak his/her mind.

Abdullah thought for a while, and then looked hopelessly at me and said: “I need time to absorb all this. You see, I was raised in all-of-one-idea environment. We debate, yes, but within the same boundaries, under the umbrella of the same school of thought, representing different angles of the same issue. The other camps have always been alien to us. They represent the rival if not the enemy. You cannot be friends with others without their subscribing to your school of thought. Besides, these disagreements are too serious to be forgiven in a minute. It is not sports. You cannot just fight it out in the field or fan club, and then leave hand-in-hand. This goes against how I was raised. You may convince me intellectually that this is the true Islamic way, but I would need lots of time and effort to change my natural response and attitude.”

I wish Abdullah were a lone case. Unfortunately, he is typical of many young people raised by some teachers, scholars, trainers and fathers to be of one idea, one group, one way. They are not used to dialogue with the others. When they confront alternative stands and thoughts, they either avoid it or fight it. Whether the fight is mental or physical, they can’t help shielding their heads and hearts against the other’s message. They feel guilty for talking nicely to holders of contradicting thoughts.

Labeling is their best game. Instead of analyzing and attempting to understand the other’s point of view, they take the easy way out by judging people’s intentions and classifying them accordingly. So, I was called in different settings, by different people, or even the same ones, so many names. In a party, last Tuesday, I was labeled by the same person as Salafi (fundamentalist), Ikhwani (of the Muslim Brotherhood), liberal and American stooge. How can I wear all these hats and kofyas at once? Go figure! So, we do have a problem. Once we recognize it and decide to face it rather than ignore and deny it as we did for ages, it is not a hopeless case. Like Abdullah, many youngsters can be impressed. With comprehensive, well-planned and thought-out, enduring and relentless program we could change even the die-hards. At least we could teach them how to make a useful dialogue.

The idea is not necessarily to makeover people, but to teach them how to be civilized: Respectful, reasonable and sensible in dealing with the different other. They could insist on their beliefs if they so wish. They could preach and try to convince us to move over to their side of any argument. But they should do so following our Islamic rules of debate (Fegh alkhelaf), not by force, not with hate, disrespect and dissidence.

By the way, Abdullah became an active member of our “diwania.” He turned out to be a wonderful debater. Told you! It is not over, yet!

###
*Khaled Batarfi is a Saudi journalist.
Source: Arab News, November 13, 2005
Visit the website at www.arabnews.com
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 3
Bulliet on Islamo-Christian Civilization
Sonia Nettnin

Chicago – Dr. Richard W. Bulliet spoke about his recent book, The Case for Islamo-Christian Civilization, to members of The Colombia University Club at Sofitel Chicago Water Tower.

Bulliet is a professor of history at Columbia University, where he has taught all periods of Middle Eastern history. For twelve years he served as director of the university‘s Middle East Institute. In addition to his academic work Bulliet wrote four novels that involve the modern Middle East -- where he has traveled often and widely.

After 09/11, several political leaders and academic scholars used the phrase, “clashes of civilization” in the media. Their endorsements established a dichotomy between America’s position and the Muslim world. Based on the factual events of history – from the Renaissance through the 20th century - Bulliet offers a dramatically different counterpoint.

“Whether you’re Muslim or American or Chinese or Indian the problem is if you recognize the ‘clash of civilizations,’ it gets you no where good and with no signposts,” Bulliet said. “What I hope and is absolutely necessary is we experience inclusion with Arabs and Muslims in America.”

Although America has pride in its moments of inclusion, one of the current struggles within American society is xenophobia: people who fear and/or hate other people they consider foreign. As long as Anglo-Americans’ prejudices regarding Arabs and Muslims exist their hostility debilitates American society. While U.S. leaders preach to the world about American values of equality and acceptance, the international community sees the hostility Arabs and Muslims endure in the U.S. and abroad. Whether people are acting upon these prejudices or they are on the receiving end of them, people are struggling with prejudices and against them.

Another example Bulliet gave is the use of the phrase “Judeo-Christian civilization.” Prior to World War II the phrase is hard to find, yet it became so widely used that it is an important moment in American history. The phrase’s connotation is that Judeo-Christian civilization is rooted in Western culture. “The popularization of the phrase is a response to the Holocaust,” Bulliet added.

Although historians cannot point to the person who penned the phrase (German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche may have used it connotatively), the point Bulliet emphasized is that the use and meaning of the phrase after WW II changed the master narrative. In history the master narrative is the record of past events, and only primary historians can change master narratives. Historians understand that history was written by people who lived certain experiences in their lives, and they had expectations of societal futures.

When it comes to the likenesses between Western European society, Mediterranean society and African society, Bulliet makes a powerful case of identifying centuries of borrowing between these societies thereby “monkeying with” the master narrative. “What I do in this book is try to create a new reading of what the past has been so we can have a new prospect of what the future will be.”

Some people may question why Bulliet did not use the phrase “Islamo-Christian-Judeo civilization.” Bulliet is not interested in a scriptural reading of history. His research focuses on shared interests between people because they borrow language, religion and culture within their respective societies. Although Bulliet pointed out that people of different faiths lived side-by-side “…it doesn’t mean they are apart at the profound level.” He added that there has been extensive writing on the Judeo-Islamic civilization and the Islamo-Byzantine (East Christian) civilization that illustrates the fruitful, long-lasting and dynamic history between these peoples.

Bulliet gave numerous examples of how present-day society is based on the Islamic world. During a typical morning a person takes a shower with a hard bar of soap. He drinks coffee with sugar in a glazed cup. While he reads the newspaper he has orange juice in a transparent glass. Later in the day he may eat pasta. If he works in a medical profession he may play chess, backgammon or cards (if he has time). The point is that all of these items – including the medical profession - derive from the Islamic world.

“When we look at our society we’re not that different from Muslim societies,” Bulliet said. “No one will ever talk about the massive borrowing in the Renaissance from the Muslim world.”

When there is discussion about European history in relation to the Muslim world, most people do not focus on the fact that the people of Europe and the Middle East lived in sibling societies that borrowed from each other’s models. Instead, people talk about the Crusades. However, most of the borrowing took place after 1500 because prior to the 12th century European history shows that the Christian religion was for the elite.

By the 12th century, in what is often referred to as the great days of Baghdad, virtually everyone in the Middle East converted to Islam. As the dominant structure of society it taught people to be humble and spiritual, and the primary agents of these teachings were the Sufi Brotherhoods.

During the 16th century Western Christendom had a rigid ecclesiastical structure. The Reformation created the Protestant Churches and changes within the Catholic Church, which involved a hierarchical structure. Regardless of the differences between the West and the Muslim world in societal structures, people in both societies saw the tendency for monarchs to rule despotically. In response to oppression societies put civil and religious mechanisms in place that could serve as counterbalances to the rulers.

“There is a parallel in the history of the West and in the Muslim world,” Bulliet said. “Tyranny is undesirable and should be curbed.”

He explained that in the West opposition to tyranny caused the growth of democracy, but in the Islamic world Muslim scholars and Islamic lawyers challenged tyranny of monarchies through Shariah law. However, governments in Egypt and Turkey recognized the success of tyrannies in Europe, such as the Emperor of France Napoleon Bonaparte, who ruled from 1804-1815. In the Middle East Islamist movements had political groups that advocated for elections and universal suffrage and from their point of view “…everyone should vote because this is how we curb tyranny,” Bulliet added.

Although Americans say they have a secular government, the rest of the world watches T.V. and sees that religion and politics are together in the U.S. With respect to the Arab world, “it is difficult for Americans coming from a Western background to see the idea that religion and politics can act in the same arena.”

Bulliet emphasized that there is no clash of civilizations and when talking about the future of the Middle East, “democracy is possible,” he said, “but you can’t get there without going through the front yard of Islamic politics.” Moreover, a divergence of views exists within the Arab world as to how Islam should relate to democracy because there is no agreed definition as to how Islam relates to power and politics. For quite some time there has been an election-based movement in the Arab world and how it would come to fruition with totalitarian regimes. At present there are numerous Muslim scholars and an enormous effervescence of Islamic thought.

When asked why the Arab world has not established democracy, Bulliet said: “They’ve been trying to install democratic regimes for decades and we have not been helpful because the structure of totalitarianism in the Muslim world is something rooted in the Cold War.” He added that the U.S. supported authoritarian rule as long as it closed out the Soviet Union and that our present-day policymakers are from the Cold War.

“We get attacked because we supported tyrannies,” he said.

Bulliet stressed that Americans should accept Arab-Americans and Muslim-Americans “…in our society as a moment of inclusion, just like the Civil Rights Movement and it would be something we can be proud of.”

###
* Sonia Nettnin a US Journalist writes about social, political, economic, and cultural issues. Her focus is the Middle East.
Source: Amin.org, November 21, 2005
Visit the website at www.amin.org
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 4
Tolerance in Islam
Lily Zakiyah Munir

Jombang, Indonesia - In the last few years we have witnessed a series of terrorist acts perpetrated in the name of Islam.

It is hard to believe that Indonesian Islam, which was traditionally respected for its tolerance and respect for diversity and plurality, has now become tarnished with various acts of heinous violence and intolerance. Peaceful coexistence of diverse faiths and beliefs is being challenged by radicalism.

It seems easy now for some Muslims to condemn others, both Muslims and non-Muslims alike, as being sinful, deviant, unbelievers or damned, as if they were little gods who can look into people's hearts. This phenomenon is worth reflecting on, as are also the factors that may have triggered this radicalism.

In Islam, diversity and plurality are part of the divine intent and purpose of God's creation.

To the radicals, the above Koranic precepts do not seem to exist. They resort to different verses, quoting them textually in isolation, and paying no attention to the socio-historical context of their revelation. Neither do they relate them to the moral and ethical values of Islam, such as mercy, justice, peace, kindness and goodness.

Verses they often use to justify their intolerant conducts are like QS al-Baqarah/2:120, "Never will the Jews and the Christians be satisfied with you unless you follow their form of religion," or QS al-Ma'idah/5:51, "O you who believe, do not take the Jews and Christians as allies. They are allies of each other, and he among you who becomes their ally is one of them."

Another concept that needs clarification is jihad. Jihad simply means to strive hard or to struggle in pursuit of a just cause. The Prophet Muhammad said that the highest form of jihad is the struggle waged to cleanse oneself from the vices of the heart, selfish desires and ambitions.

From the Koranic point of view, jihad means a struggle on intellectual grounds against those who oppress people, treat them unjustly, subject them to torture and cruelty, and violate legitimate human rights. The purpose of this struggle is to bring about justice, peace and equality.

Apart from the ideological and spiritual meanings, struggle in the physical sense is also considered as jihad. However, this has to be carried out solely for defensive purposes. Jihad for acts of aggression against innocent people would be unjust and a great distortion of the true meaning of the term.

Jihad is often equated with "holy war." This notion, in Arabic al-harb al-muqaddasah, does not exist in the Koran. War is never holy; it is either justified or not. And if it is justified, those who get killed in the battle are considered martyrs.

The just and tolerant practices of the Prophet Muhammad towards "the People of the Book" (Christians and Jews) set a very good example to Muslims. The contract the Prophet made with the Christians of Najran secured peaceful religious coexistence. This is a manifestation of the Koranic injunction on religious tolerance, "Those who believe (in the Koran), and those who follow the Jewish, and the Christians and the Sabians, any who believe in Allah ... shall have their reward ... (QS al-Baqarah/2:62).

The Constitution of Madinah is the most important contract that secured justice and religious tolerance among Muslim, Christian, Jewish, and pagan communities. The Constitution ensured that everyone was free to adhere to any belief or religion or to make any political or philosophical choice.

Everyone was free to exercise his/her own justice system. But no protection would be given to anyone committing a crime. This contract, which was in force for 10 years, changed society from a tribal structure based on blood and kinship into a united social system comprising people of different cultural, ethnic and geographical backgrounds. The Constitution of Madinah secured absolute religious freedom.

In conclusion, it is necessary to stress the importance of a contextual approach in interpreting the Koran. Any text, including Koranic text, speaks through its readers. The meaning of the text is not fixed simply by the literal meaning of the words, but depends, too, on the moral construction given to it by the reader. To promote tolerance, the relevant texts should be approached with moral commitments; otherwise, they will produce nothing but discrete, legalistic and technical insights.

###
* The writer is Director of the Center for Pesantren and Democracy Studies (CEPDES), Jombang, East Java. She can be reached at lilyzm@hotmail.com.
Source: Jakarta Post, November 23 2005
Visit the website at www.jakartapost.com
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 5
What is the best way for Arab media to talk peace?
Mohammad Gohar

Cairo - Arab-American relations have reached a critical stage. Misconceptions, on both sides of the divide, threaten to undermine the desires of mainstream citizens for peace, stability and democratic progression. Mass media in the Middle East, and the broadcast sector in particular, stand the greatest chance of helping bridge the gap of understanding and repair some of the damage caused by decades of agenda-laden, biased media platforms.

The time has come for a new localized voice in media, committed to the production and support of sustained peace in the region.

Citizens in the Middle East are beginning to grow accustomed to concepts such as democratization, modernization, community development, and the war against terrorism. Great strides have been made toward opening the minds of Arabs to a future of greater political and economic potential. But at what point will regional media outlets link the very concept of "peace" to this new mindset? It has not happened so far, yet it must if we are ever to achieve peace.

Recent political trends in the region have given broadcasters an opportunity to introduce greater professionalism into their coverage. Governmental reform means more freedom for journalists to fulfill their obligations as providers of information, context and understanding. Journalists can now prepare stories faster, more accurately, and in greater depth than ever before. They can even inform the region of political developments once considered taboo by the establishment - progressive projects such as the Qualified Industrial Jones Agreement between Israel and Egypt, the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, the Egypt-Israeli Tourism Agreement and others.

Given this new framework, how can we best promote peace itself as a fundamental right of all Arab citizens? Political parties have an obligation to support peace initiatives, both in their own communications departments, and by fostering a more open public discussion of its value and necessity. This should not only be done in the abstract; peace must also be incorporated into all categories of dialogue, from economic growth to foreign investment to development projects to public infrastructure. Confrontational posturing must be abandoned in exchange for building a psychological linkage between peace and prosperity.

Before this can happen, an accurate study of popular opinion, with specific respect to the peace process, must be conducted, providing a clear picture of audience viewpoints. This should be done from the street, and must result in a thorough categorization based upon age, gender, income brackets, social background and geography. One cannot begin to persuade an audience without first knowing the audience. Based on this gathered data, a team can formulate a new mechanism for approaching mass media outlets and framing messages towards specific, target demographics. Without the ability to target people with accuracy, words of peace will continue to fall on deaf ears. Likewise, content must be crafted towards specific platforms - satellite broadcasting, as an example, is a far different animal than terrestrial radio, and simple re-versioning of material does not get the message through. Different venues call for different approaches.

In bringing this message to media outlets, we must ask some crucial questions: Are the current public-relations apparatuses sufficient? Are we satisfied with the level of public response we've seen to the peace process? If not, perhaps the time has come for a new, dedicated mechanism and vantage point from which to build support. However, any new approach must take into full account the diversity of media platforms facing Arab consumers now and in the immediate future: satellite broadcasting, terrestrial television, radio broadcasts, print journals, Internet hubs including blogs and news servers, mobile phone media platforms, and street advertisements. Only a cross-media approach has a chance of achieving the kind of audience penetration necessary for sustained peace building.

We cannot discuss a fresh approach to media without raising the issue of finance. It is a well-reported fact that terrorists and fundamentalist factions have invested far more in mass media than their "moderate" counterparts have. As media become increasingly privatized, the door is opened for investment from any source with desire and capital. But without a counterbalancing influx of investment from the right sources, viewpoints expressed throughout pan-Arab media will continue to skew towards counterproductive ideologies. Audiences in the Middle East today are treated more for their capacities as consumers than as human beings, and so are spoken to in a language that speaks to their quickest impulses, and not their intellectual potential. This trend can only be reversed by private investment stemming from responsible sources having a vested interest in peace. Today, mainstream media often operate as an obstacle, inhibiting an open discussion of the peace process by promoting an oppositional mindset predicated on illusion.

To create an influx of private, responsible media investment in the region, we must consider two phases. Firstly, private media entrepreneurs will depend on startup assistance from U.S. development agencies, European foundations and Japanese aid - mainly through diplomatic support and partnership. Private firms committed to peace-building must be given the backup they need to succeed.

Secondly, and more critical towards creating a sustainable business model, a new mechanism of advertising revenue must be introduced to private media. The largest sources of industrial advertising in the Middle East, among which are many U.S.-based multinational corporations, must be able to purchase direct market access, and they must be able to do this independently of the current, dominant regional advertising firms. In this way, responsible private media will be rewarded with sustained capital from advertising revenue, and regional ad-brokers (whose imperative it is to stifle the creation of progressive media - will be bypassed. The result of this new mechanism can be a Qualified Media Zone, a protected umbrella beneath which private media can operate under the best professional ideals and, through privatized practices, foster a democratic future in the Middle East.

###
* Mohammad Gohar is the CEO of Video Cairo Sat.
Source: CGNews, November 22, 2005
Visit the website at www.commongroundnews.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 week, CGNews-PiH will distribute 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.

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. Student journalists and writers under the age of 27 are encouraged to write cbinkley@sfcg.org for more information on contributing.

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-PiH, 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 – Partners in Humanity
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

Juliette Schmidt
Beirut Editor

Elyte Baykun & Leena El-Ali
Washington Editors

Chris Binkley
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 November 30, 2005 12:41 PM