Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
June 13, 2006

**********

The Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) aims to promote constructive perspectives and dialogue about Muslim-Western relations.

*This service is also available in Arabic, Bahasa Indonesia and French. You can subscribe by sending an email to cgnewspih@sfcg.org specifying your choice of language.

*Unless otherwise noted, copyright permission has been obtained and articles may be reprinted by any news outlet or publication. Please acknowledge both the original source and the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

*For an archive of CGNews articles and other information, please visit our website at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/).

*Due to changes in CGNews' administration during the week of 19th June, there may be some temporary difficulties in dissemination. If you experience any, please contact the administrator: kzehr@sfcg.org.

**********

ARTICLES IN THIS EDITION:

1. Clear scores, level playing fields and global appeal: why the UN envies the World Cup by Kofi Annan
Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the United Nations, compares international politics to the most talked about event around the world – the World Cup. He highlights the series’ transparent qualities - the game, the players and the results are there for the world to see; its ability to generate free discussion on both the best and the worst aspects of the game; its promotion of talent and teamwork above personal power or wealth; its seamless integration of foreign talent into local teams; and its ability to propel even the world’s most crisis-ridden countries to stardom. For the next few weeks at least, as we sit in front of television screens around the world, we will all share in our common humanity.
(Source: Daily Star, June 7, 2006)

2. ~YOUTH VIEWS~ A wave of democracy? by Bassem El Sharouney and Stephanie Rowe
Bassem El Sharouney and Stephanie Rowe, participants in the Soliya Arab-American dialogue program, evaluate the Bush Administration’s drive for democracy in the Middle East. Looking as an example at the elections in Egypt, they acknowledge that it did not become the success story that had been anticipated, however it did result in widespread outrage in both international and local press, providing a level of transparency to the mangled process. They laud U.S. efforts to learn from their mistakes and to continue to push for a free Middle East, yet warn that “impatience and intimidation will not hasten the process or ensure just and sustainable reform”.
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), June 13, 2006)

3. The international terrorist conspiracy by Gwynne Dyer
Gwynne Dyer, a London-based journalist, dispels the myth of an international coalition of organised terrorists with one sole target: the West. Considering the recent arrest of 17 Canadians who were allegedly planning a terrorist attack within their country, as well as the “home grown” terrorists in London and Madrid, he argues that “the contrast between the received wisdom — that the world, or at least the West, is engaged in a titanic, unending struggle against a terrorist organisation of global reach — and the not very impressive reality is so great that most people in the West believe the official narrative rather than the evidence of their own eyes.”
(Source: Jordan Times, June 6, 2006)

4. Women Journalists Share Experiences Around Med by Samar Fatany
Samar Fatany, a Saudi journalist, writes about her participation in the recent conference “Women, Media and the Mediterranean,” an event which “provided an opportunity for dialogue and an exchange of experience between journalists from print media, television and radio” across the region. Looking at the obstacles and opportunities for European and Arab women in the media, participants advocated working together to find peaceful solutions to the cultural and political misunderstandings of their readers. She concludes that “by learning from the experiences of journalists in other nations, we should be able to find better ways to do things, speed up the process of reform and help women take up their rightful role in our society.”
(Source: Arab News, June 13, 2006)

5. Moderate Western Muslims, speak up! by Rondi Adamson
Canadian journalist, Rondi Adamson, is baffled by Toronto mayor, David Miller’s response to the arrests of 17 Canadians on charges of plotting a terrorist attach. “We need strategies to try to prevent that from happening again," he said. Considering the high level of integration of Muslims in Canadian society, compared with European countries, she questions whether it is possible for the Canadian government to do more on its own, and asks Western Muslims to help by wholeheartedly condemning “Islamofascism” without any conditions.
(Source: Christian Science Monitor, June 6, 2006)

**********

ARTICLE 1
Clear scores, level playing fields and global appeal: why the UN envies the World Cup
Kofi Annan

New York - You may wonder what a secretary general of the United Nations is doing writing about soccer. But in fact, the World Cup makes us in the UN green with envy. As the pinnacle of the only truly global game, played in every country by every race and religion, it is one of the few phenomena as universal as the United Nations. You could even say it's more universal. FIFA has 207 members; we have only 191.

But there are far better reasons to be envious.

First, the World Cup is an event in which everybody knows where their team stands, and what it did to get there. They know who scored and how and in what minute of the game; they know who missed the open goal; they know who saved the penalty. I wish we had more of that sort of competition in the family of nations. Countries openly vying for the best standing in the table of respect for human rights, and trying to outdo one another in child survival rates or enrolment in secondary education. States parading their performance for all the world to see. Governments being held accountable for what actions led them to that result.

Second, the World Cup is an event that everybody on the planet loves talking about. Dissecting what their team did right, and what it could have done differently - not to mention the other side's team. People sitting in cafes anywhere from Buenos Aires to Beijing, debating the finer points of games endlessly, revealing an intimate knowledge not only of their own national teams but of many of the others too, and expressing themselves on the subject with as much clarity as passion. Normally tongue-tied teenagers suddenly becoming eloquent, confident, and dazzlingly analytical experts. I wish we had more of that sort of conversation in the world at large. Citizens consumed by the topic of how their country could do better on the Human Development Index, or in reducing the number of carbon emissions or new HIV infections.

Third, the World Cup is an event that takes place on a level playing field, where every country has a chance to participate on equal terms. Only two commodities matter in this game: talent and teamwork. I wish we had more levellers like that in the global arena. Free and fair exchanges without the interference of subsidies, barriers or tariffs.

Fourth, the World Cup is an event that illustrates the benefits of cross-pollination between peoples and countries. More and more national teams now welcome coaches from other countries, who bring new ways of thinking and playing. The same goes for the increasing number of players who between World Cups represent clubs away from home. They inject new qualities into their new team, grow from the experience, and are able to contribute even more to their home side when they return. In the process, they often become heroes in their adopted countries - helping to open hearts and broaden minds. I wish it were equally plain for all to see that human migration in general can create triple wins - for migrants, for their countries of origin, and for the societies that receive them. That migrants not only build better lives for themselves and their families, but are also agents of development.

For any country, playing in the World Cup is a matter of profound national pride. For countries qualifying for the first time, such as my native Ghana, it is a badge of honour. For those who are doing so after years of adversity, such as Angola, it provides a sense of national renewal. And for those who are currently driven by conflict, like Cote d'Ivoire, but whose World Cup team is a unique and powerful symbol of national unity, it inspires nothing less than the hope of national rebirth.

Which brings me to what is perhaps most enviable of all for us in the United Nations: the World Cup is an event in which we actually see goals being reached. I'm not talking only about the goals a country scores; I also mean the most important goal of all - being there, part of the family of nations and peoples, celebrating our common humanity. I'll try to remember that when Ghana plays Italy in Hanover on June 12. Of course, I can't promise

I'll succeed.

###
* Kofi Annan in the first person. Kofi Annan is secretary general of the United Nations. This article is distributed by The Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/).
Source: Daily Star, June 7, 2006
Visit the website at www.dailystar.com.lb (http://www.dailystar.com.lb/)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 2
~YOUTH VIEWS~
A wave of democracy?
Bassem El Sharouney and Stephanie Rowe

Cairo & Danville, Kentucky - Spreading democracy is the cornerstone of the Bush administration’s foreign policy. Encouraging free elections across the Middle East has been touted as a way to turn the tide in the political climate of the region. The promoters of this policy hope that authoritarian regimes with no regard for human rights or free enterprise will end the abuse of their populations and interference with American interests: that soon the Middle East will be dotted with American-style democracy, with the few hold-outs crumbling beneath domestic and international pressure. They hold that recent elections across the region are an example of this movement. But how much effect have recent elections had? Do elections really equate to democracy? An examination of Egypt’s first multi-party elections does not validate the administration’s claims.

In the years following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, President Bush’s Middle East policy and national security strategy have focused on encouraging the spread of democracy around the world. In a landmark speech in November 2003, President Bush stated:

“Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe – because in the long run, stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty. As long as the Middle East remains a place where freedom does not flourish, it will remain a place of stagnation, resentment, and violence ready for export…. Therefore, the United States has adopted a new policy, a forward strategy of freedom in the Middle East.”

This policy has taken several forms, including both friendly and not so friendly diplomatic pressure and even war. Neo-conservatives, like their hard-core anti-Communist predecessors, believe in the domino effect, but today, it is democracy that is supposed to spread like a virus. Iraq was to be the poster child for a peaceful, post-authoritarian democracy. Despite the continued mayhem in Iraq, the administration argues progress has been made in the region.

President Bush is particularly proud of the democratic progress made in Egypt. A combination of diplomatic and internal pressure encouraged Egyptian President Mubarak to allow the country’s first multi-party elections in 2005. The Bush administration lauded the process as a breakthrough. In his 2006 State of the Union address, even after the many flaws in the Egyptian election process had been revealed, Bush praised the efforts, saying, “We're writing a new chapter in the story of self-government – with…men and women from Lebanon to Egypt debating the rights of individuals and the necessity of freedom.”

Although the administration’s optimism was also echoed by both the Egyptian and the American press, once the process had begun it became clear that Mubarak had not relinquished as much control as expected. The voting process was revealed to have been dubious, and vote-buying was readily apparent. The Egyptian media, to their credit, did not shirk from reporting on the corruption. Pictures of campaign members distributing valuable gifts and money to voters at polls were all over the media. The Egyptian media also showed that out-and-out cheating was occurring. Although anti-cheating measures, such as glass polling boxes, were taken, tampering still occurred. Overt campaigning by Muslim fundamentalists, who seem not to have entirely accepted the key democratic concept of equal rights, particularly as it pertains to Coptic Christians in Egypt, also cast a shadow over the process.

The revelation of tampering in the presidential elections led the Bush administration to tone down its praise for Mubarak and pressure the regime for freer and more legitimate parliamentary elections, which soon followed. Unfortunately, corruption and governmental interference continued and even intensified as Mubarak grew apprehensive about political change.

If there is one glimmer of hope in Egypt, it is that the media was able to fairly and honestly report on events, revealing to Egyptians how mangled the process was.

The Bush administration has acknowledged that elections do not make a democracy, but it continues to emphasise voting, even at the expense of other issues, or when only a small segment of the population actually votes, as was the case in Egypt. Bush has even acknowledged that the American democracy model is not the model for all nations and that the development of a true and functioning democracy surely takes time. However, the rhetoric of a coming flood of political change and a policy of military intervention if the leadership of Middle Eastern countries is not to the United States’ liking contradicts these statements. Democracy may someday come to Egypt and its neighbours, but impatience and intimidation will not hasten the process or ensure just and sustainable reform.

###
* Bassem El Sharouney and Stephanie Rowe co-wrote this article as part of the Soliya Arab-American dialogue program (www.soliya.net.) This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), June 13, 2006
Visit the website at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 3
The international terrorist conspiracy
Gwynne Dyer

London - They arrested 17 alleged Islamist terrorists in and around Toronto on Saturday, most of them young and Canadian-born. They had bought three tonnes of ammonium nitrate and are accused of planning to bomb targets in southern Ontario.

Shock! Horror! How could this happen here?

Canada refused to take part in the US invasion of Iraq, so most people assumed that it was therefore an unlikely target for terrorist attacks. Relatively speaking, it probably still is — but it does have several thousand troops in Afghanistan, and the new government in Ottawa is actively seeking closer ties to the Bush administration. Enough, perhaps, to motivate a bunch of radicalised young Muslim-Canadians who couldn’t reach non-Canadian targets anyway.

Any terrorist attack on Canada is bound to be home grown, because there is no shadowy but powerful network of international Islamist terrorists waging a war against the West; there are isolated small groups of extremists who blow things up once in a while, and there are websites and other media through which they can exchange ideas and techniques, but there are no headquarters, no chain of command, no organisation that can be defeated, dismantled and destroyed.

There have been Islamist terrorist groups in the Arab world for decades, but there never was much of an international Islamist “terrorist network”. Even in Al Qaeda’s heyday, before the US invasion of Afghanistan effectively beheaded it in 2001, there were only a few hundred core members.

According to US intelligence estimates, between 30,000 and 70,000 volunteers passed through Al Qaeda’s training camps in Afghanistan in 1996-2001, but their long-term impact on the world has been very small. For most people who went to those camps, it was more a rite of passage than the start of a lifelong career as a terrorist. The average annual number of Islamist terrorist attacks in Arab and other Muslim countries has been no greater in the past five years than in the previous ten or twenty.

The West has been even less affected. The Sept. 11 attacks on the United States were a spectacularly successful fluke, killing almost 3,000 people, but there have been no further Islamist attacks in the US. The two subsequent attacks that did occur in the West, in Madrid in 2004 and in London last year, cost the lives of 245 people. And those attacks were both carried out by local people with no links to any “international terrorist network”.

The contrast between the received wisdom — that the world, or at least the West, is engaged in a titanic, unending struggle against a terrorist organisation of global reach — and the not very impressive reality is so great that most people in the West believe the official narrative rather than the evidence of their own eyes. There must be a major terrorist threat; otherwise, the government is wrong or lying, the intelligence agencies are wrong or self-serving, the media are fools or cowards, and the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with fighting terrorism.

There isn’t a major terrorist threat; just a little one. The massive over-reaction called “the war on terror” is due to the fact that Sept. 11 hit a very big and powerful country that had the military resources to strike anywhere in the world, and strategic interests that might be advanced by a war or two fought under the cover of a crusade against terrorism. If Sept. 11 had happened in Canada, it would all have been very different.

A kind of Sept. 11 did happen in Canada. The largest casualty toll of any terrorist attack in the West before 2001 was the 329 people who were killed in the terrorist bombing of Air India Flight 182, en route from Toronto to London, in 1985. Two hundred and eighty of the dead were Canadian citizens. Since Canada has only one-tenth the population of the United States, it was almost exactly the same proportionate loss that the United States suffered in Sept. 11.

It was immediately clear that the terrorists were Sikhs seeking independence from India, but here’s what Canada didn’t do: It didn’t send troops into India to “stamp out the roots of the terrorism” and it didn’t declared a “global war on terror”. Partly because it lacked the resources for that sort of adventure, of course, but also because it would have been stupid. Instead, it tightened up security at airports, and launched a police investigation of the attack.

The investigation was not very successful, and 21 years later most of the culprits have still not been punished. But Sikh terrorism eventually died down even though nobody invaded Punjab, and nobody else got hurt in Canada. Sometimes not doing much is the right thing to do.

Not doing too much would have been the right response in 2001, too. It was legal for Washington to invade Afghanistan after Sept. 11, and public outrage in the US made it almost unavoidable politically, but it was bound to end in tears. If the Afghan regime could have been forced to shut Al Qaeda camps down without an invasion it would have been the wiser course of action. The right goal was not to fall into Osama Bin Laden’s trap, and not to act in ways that spread suspicion and hostility in Muslim communities at home and abroad.

But it would probably still have been all right if they hadn’t invaded Iraq.

###
* Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/).
Source: Jordan Times, June 6, 2006
Visit the website at www.jordantimes.com (http://www.jordantimes.com/)
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH).
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 4
Women Journalists Share Experiences Around Med
Samar Fatany

Jeddah - Historically, the great ideas of civilisations have travelled back and forth across the waters of the Mediterranean, and that tradition continued recently when women journalists from the Mediterranean countries met in Beirut to discuss the way forward.

The conference, “Women, Media and the Mediterranean,” was held in May and was organised by ANSAMed and the Arab Italian Women Association (AIWA) in a bid to strengthen the role of women in the world of information, to share experience and build a common vision for media organisations. The event provided an opportunity for dialogue and an exchange of experience between journalists from print media, television and radio from several Mediterranean countries and was attended by many of the region’s most prominent journalists.

“The media is the voice of the people,” Silvia di Savoia, Duchess of Aosta and AIWA’s honorary president, told participants. “We all base our knowledge of others on what the information we get tells us. In a world where information has a growing responsibility, women have a major role, because they are less aggressive and more prone to seek dialogue.”

She outlined the aims of AIWA, which are to promote cultural, informational exchange to overcome prejudices and preconceptions that became stronger after Sept. 11, 2001.

“Mediterranean women have a unique opportunity to find a peaceful solution to many problems of cultural, religious and political nature that are often resolved with violence,” said Roberto Cantore, the Italian business attaché to Lebanon.

Although many of the participants noted progress throughout the region, some noted obstacles still remain.

“The journalist’s role in the Mediterranean states has radically changed in the last few years,” said Barbara Serra, of Al-Jazeera’s English service. “They have more space but still remain bound to do the same job. It is difficult for them to request a role in management in television, radio or newspapers.”

Serra stressed that women’s role in the media is fundamental because they represent half the population and can — and must — speak to the people about the people. If the media is the mirror of the population, she said, it is right for women to take positions of more responsibility, which, she noted, is unfortunately not the case in many media organisations.

From the observations of many of the participants, it appeared the problem is widespread.

There are very few women journalists in decision-making positions, though there are many highly qualified and capable columnists, presenters, reporters and talk-show hosts both in political and non-political programs.

Many women journalists have risked their lives to cover wars and conflicts; some have become targets of terrorists. Allow me to share with you some of the statistics and information about the situations of Mediterranean women in media: In Jordan and Algeria, women have claimed positions of editor in chief, while in France even more women are joining the ranks of journalists, taking 43 percent of all media jobs; however, they still take a disproportionate number of the top positions. Moreover, women are paid less compared to man in the same job.

The media in Spain continues to be dominated by men. According to a recent report, women have 43 percent of all jobs in the media — 63 percent of them have university degrees; male university graduates working in Spanish media account for only 39 percent of the number of men so employed. When it comes to careers, men hold most of the management or directorial positions, while women mostly work as editors.

In Egypt, women are underrepresented in the management of state-owned newspapers but hold high-responsibility jobs in television. More importantly wages for men and women are equal. In Morocco, women journalists hold the highest positions and collaborate very well with men. The estimates of the Italian Media Federation show that there are many Italian women working in the media, but they take lower positions in the hierarchy, including part-time contracts.

The situation is similar in Lebanon, where the women working in the sector are an integral part of the greater Arab media world. Lebanese women have played a central role in local and Arab media over the past decades as columnists, presenters, reporters and hosts of political and non-political programs. They paved the way for a new generation of journalists who are integral part of Arab media.

Among the participants were leading newspaper, radio and television journalists from Italy, Spain, Turkey, Morocco, Jordan, Egypt, Algeria, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates, Yemen and Dubai, including Lebanese Gisela Khovry of TV Arabiya, Turkish columnist Ferai Tinc, Irene Lozano from Spanish ABC, Egyptian Rola Kharsa, Barbara Serra from London Al-Jazeera, Italian journalist Giovanna Botteri and Tiziana Ferrario. We shared our experiences and exchanged views and ideas about making the voices of women better heard on both global issues and those related to women. I was proud to share the achievements of Saudi women in media, both in projecting the new emerging role of women in Saudi society and discussing the challenges they face to become builders of society and promoters of peace.

Among the recommendations of the two-day conference were the establishment of an information network among Mediterranean women in media and a program to provide training for Mediterranean journalists to give a stronger voice to women and improve their conditions in the region. I hope that Saudi women in media will benefit from initiatives and work hard to upgrade the level of professionalism in our nation’s media.

There is an urgent need to create a more responsible media that can confront the many challenges ahead and serve in the development of our society. We need to develop a media that is professional in its approach and able to deal with issues in a specialised and scientific manner. Training and learning from experience both can contribute to upgrading the quality of our journalists.

It is important for our media to promote the culture of dialogue and to encourage citizens to exchange views openly. There are many concerns that need to be addressed and of which the community should be made aware. The media has a responsibility to play a more active role in projecting our true Islamic values of justice, equality, tolerance and respect for knowledge.

By learning from the experiences of journalists in other nations, we should be able to find better ways to do things, speed up the process of reform and help women take up their rightful role in our society. The sooner, the better. We need all the help we can get.

###
* Samar Fatany is a radio journalist based in Jeddah. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/).
Source: Arab News, June 13, 2006
Visit the website at www.arabnews.com (http://www.arabnews.com/)
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH).
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 5
Moderate Western Muslims, speak up!
Rondi Adamson

Toronto – In the months following 9/11, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman said that rather than constantly ask ourselves, "Why do they hate us?", we should instead ask, "Why don't they see us for who we really are?"

I thought about that following the arrests of 17 Canadian terror suspects last weekend. Most were citizens of Canada, born and bred, or residents. The police who announced the dragnet were careful to say that the young males did not represent any specific ethno cultural group - though all are Muslim.

Toronto's mayor, David Miller, after commending the excellent work of Canada's security forces, wondered aloud why young people might get involved in terrorist activities. We need "strategies to try to prevent that from happening again," he said. His earnestness awed me. Can he truly believe there is some "thing" Canadians can do (hold a "Hands Across Canada" event?) to prevent this kind of occurrence?

Canada is not France. Canada's Muslim population is not marginalised out of fear and contempt, not left alone to manage its own affairs. Even though a Toronto mosque had its windows smashed following the arrests, that sort of thuggery and stupidity is not systemic or common. Canada's Muslims are not prevented from attending good schools or holding high-powered jobs. Nor are they, for the most part, unwilling or unable to fit in peacefully and productively. So the mayor's concern was misplaced. His comment should have been something along the lines of, "I wonder what Canada's Muslim leaders/moderate Muslim citizens can do to prevent this kind of thing in future?"

In countries like Canada, or England, or Spain, where citizens have been shocked by the news of home-grown cells, I believe more needs to be asked of Muslim religious and community leaders. Western Muslims are a powerful potential ally in the broader "war on terror." It is true that most Muslims are not terrorists. But we need Muslims themselves to admit that most of the terrorists who threaten us are Muslim.

Aly Hindy, a high-profile imam in the Toronto suburb of Scarborough, called the arrests "an attack on the Muslim community." He went on to say that, "We are abusing our boys for the sake of pleasing George Bush." Rather than speaking out against extremism, or entertaining the notion that perhaps his country's security forces know what they're doing, Hindy called the charges against the men "home-grown baloney."

Even moderate Canadian Muslim groups, willing to show faith in Canada's justice system, are mitigating their statements. The Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC) praised the work of Canada's spy agency and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. But then they scolded the Canadian government for not funding "academic research to diagnose this serious social problem and provide scientific solutions to it." A scientific solution to Islamofascism? Bring it on.

The group also chastised Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper for portraying events "as a battle between 'us' and 'them.' “Following the arrests, Mr. Harper stated that "we are a target because of who we are. And how we live." One wonders - do the members of the CIC not consider themselves part of the "we" Harper referred to, when he spoke of Canadians? If so, that is indeed revealing.

The Muslim Canadian Congress fared only a tad bit better. They praised the police, and expressed dismay that members of their community might be guilty as charged. And then they managed to blame President Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and even Harper for the fact that any such terror cells might exist. So far, only the Council on American-Islamic Relations Canada (CAIR-CAN) has managed to issue a condemnation of terror, and praise of the police, without tacking on a "but," a "Bush," or a "Canadian troops in Afghanistan."

I was happily surprised at CAIR-CAN's press release. I shouldn't have been. We must expect that Western Muslims will wholeheartedly condemn Islamofascism, without any conditions placed on that condemnation. Without that, we may reach a point of divisions too deep to mend.

###
* Rondi Adamson is an award-winning Canadian journalist. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/).
Source: Christian Science Monitor, June 6, 2006
Visit the website at www.csmonitor.com (http://www.csmonitor.com/)
Copyright © The Christian Science Monitor. For reprint permission please contact lawrenced@csps.com

**********

The Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) provides news, op-eds, features and analysis by local and international experts on a broad range of issues affecting Muslim-Western relations. CGNews-PiH syndicates articles that are balanced and solution-oriented to news outlets worldwide. With support from the Norwegian government and the United States Institute of Peace, this news service is a non-profit initiative of Search for Common Ground, an international NGO working in the field of conflict transformation.

This news service is one outcome of a set of working meetings held in partnership with His Royal Highness Prince El Hassan bin Talal of Jordan in June 2003.

~YOUTH VIEWS~

CGNews-PiH 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. Student journalists and writers under the age of 27 are encouraged to write to cbinkley@sfcg.org for more information on contributing.
*The views expressed in these articles are those of the authors, not of CGNews-PiH or its affiliates.

Common Ground News Service
1601 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Suite #200
Washington, DC 20009 USA
Ph: +1(202) 265-4300
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)
Juliette Schmidt (Beirut)
Chris Binkley (Dakar)
Medhy Hidayat (Jakarta)
Elyte Baykun (Washington)
Leena El-Ali (Washington)
Emmanuelle Hazan (Washington)

**********

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send an email to cgnewspih@sfcg.org with “subscribe” or “unsubscribe” in the subject line, indicating your language of choice among English, French, Arabic and Bahasa Indonesia.

Posted by Evelin at June 14, 2006 08:53 AM