Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
for constructive & vibrant Muslim-Western relations
03 - 09 October 2006

The Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) aims to promote constructive perspectives and dialogue about Muslim–Western relations. CGNews-PiH is available in Arabic, English, French and Indonesian.
For an archive of past CGNews articles and other information, please visit our website at www.commongroundnews.org.
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).

Inside this edition

1) by Amina Rasul-Bernardo

In this fourth article in a series on religious revivalism and Muslim-Western relations, Amina Rasul-Bernardo, lead convener of the Philippine Council for Islam and Democracy, considers the roots of Muslim fundamentalism in the Philippines as well as the tools that are available, and are being employed, to provide productive alternatives to joining radical religious groups. “We need to ask ourselves: do we force these devout, young Muslims towards the path of violent radicalisation through prejudice, ignorance and neglect? Or do we provide them the space to live their lives, accepted as fellow citizens? I, for one, have always believed that the threads of diversity, when accepted and celebrated by the nation, create a beautiful tapestry of its peoples.”
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 3 October 2006)

2) by Johnathon Barker

Johnathon Barker, a graduate student of English at George Washington University, denounces the predictable pattern of Muslim-Western dialogue-- “offence-apology-new offence”,-- and calls for agreement on a foundation of common terms as the basis of real, constructive dialogue. He considers the Pope’s recent and widely publicised speech as a starting point in determining how to hold a true dialogue, and what the preconditions are. “For better or worse, the questions the Pope has raised are both provocative and of the utmost importance – and it is vital that both Muslim and Western (including Christian) thinkers turn their attention to them as a common vocabulary, a basic ontology, must be agreed on for serious dialogue to even commence.”
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 3 October 2006)

3) by Choirul Mahfud

Executive director of the Institute for Religion and Social Studies and lecturer in Islamic studies at the Muhammadiyah University of Surabaya, Indonesia, Choirul Mahfud, looks at the roots of Muslim-Western discord from the perspective of Indonesian scholars and the challenges Indonesia faces with its own multicultural population. He argues that democracy is about more than just meeting the wishes of the majority. “It is time for Muslims all over the world, particularly in Indonesia, to leave behind the numbers-based religious model, and begin to demonstrate religiosity. This requires bringing Islam down to earth - upholding amr ma'ruf, nahi munkar (enjoying what is just, forbidding what is wrong): being polite, defending the oppressed, helping the poor, rejecting violence, fighting corruption and terrorism, and spreading peace throughout their country, and the world.”
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 3 October 2006)

4) by Saliba Sarsar & Yehezkel Landau

Saliba Sarsar, Professor of political science and Associate Vice President for Academic Program Initiatives at Monmouth University New Jersey, and Yehezkel Landau, Faculty Associate in interfaith relations at Hartford Seminary, ask what has happened to the moderate centre and balance of our global society and point out the key values that humanity still shares widely. “Westerners and Muslims alike need rational, humane governance and better mutual understanding. Honest engagement with each other will reveal shared values, including a dedication to social justice. We all need political and economic reforms that distribute resources more equitably. We all need to safeguard human rights, increase funding for educational and cultural exchanges, and commit ourselves to resolving conflicts through peaceful means.”
(Source: Middle East Times, 25 September 2006)

5) by Oussama K. Safa & Khalil Gebara

Oussama K. Safa, General Director of the Lebanese Center for Policy Studies and Khalil Gebara, Co-Executive Director of the Lebanese Transparency Association, describe how recent election monitoring efforts in Yemen demonstrate the feasibility of “home-grown” solutions for meeting the challenges raised by Middle East democratic initiatives. “The presence of the Arab observers in Yemen was also a strong indication that observation missions need not be foreign-inspired or concocted in Western capitals, nor do election observation missions pose a threat to a country's sovereignty… Hopefully gone are the days of political oppression and secretive democracy struggles. Arab civil society is here to stay and if anything was shown in the Yemeni experience, it was that this civil society is a mature and reliable stakeholder on the slow but sure journey toward democratic reform.”
(Source: Daily Star, 28 September 2006)

1) A perilous present and uncertain future
Amina Rasul-Bernardo

Manila - September 2, 2006 marks the tenth anniversary of the Final Peace Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the Moro National Liberation Front (GRP-MNLF). The agreement ended almost four decades of conflict between government forces and the MNLF, representing the Muslim minority.

Unfortunately, no visible economic or social progress is evident after ten years. Instead, armed conflict between the MNLF and government troops has erupted in Sulu, an island province of the Philippines. Muslims continue to live harsh lives, marked by the lowest human development indicators in the country: highest poverty rates, lowest literacy and education rates, poorest access to public services, and high mortality rates. The present is bleak for most young Muslims. Worse, they do not see a better future. Over the last decade, both poverty and armed conflict in the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) have propelled many Muslims to take two different paths of escape.

First, peaceful and moderate Muslims have been leaving the ARMM and have established communities outside Muslim Mindanao or left the country. The Muslim diaspora is spread all over the Philippines, with a tiny mosque now ensconced in each province and city. Although no census has been taken, we estimate that over a million Muslims live outside Mindanao. The largest community is in the Metro Manila region where the Muslim traders have become visible in the pearl and DVD trades. Unfortunately, these communities face increased anti-Muslim bias, triggered by post 9/11 attitudes associating terrorism with Islam.

Second, some peaceful and conservative Muslims are turning to faith, joining fundamentalist groups such as the Tableegh. The failure of modernisation and globalisation to improve their lives has made a significant segment of the population turn to the basic tenets of Islam, a defence against the perceived immorality of the modern world and anti-Muslim bias. It is this path that concerns non-Muslims.
Young Filipino Muslims are turning to religion for support as they face a future complicated by anti-Muslim bias and injustices. These factors, coupled with the inability of government to provide public services and economic opportunities (a decade after signing a peace accord that promised a better life), have pushed many young Muslims to join more radical elements. Post 9/11, the government's move to secure the state from terrorism -- sadly often associated with Muslims -- has exacerbated the situation as thousands of Muslims, including children, were illegally detained as terrorist suspects.

If we are to resolve conflicts peacefully and neutralise terrorism, the state should not fear the resurgence of Islam. Rather, the government should be supportive as it has been of Christian revivalism. Fundamentalist Muslims are no different from fundamentalist Christians: both find assurance within the assembly of the faithful. For instance, hundreds of thousands of Catholics, most of whom have experienced hardships, have joined a movement called El Shaddai, a charismatic Catholic sect attracting more than a million followers. They believe that collective prayer will fulfil their dreams. Brother Mike Velarde, a businessman turned preacher, started El Shaddai and has parlayed its popularity into political and economic power, often wooed by the country's top political leaders. The Catholic Church has actually assigned senior prelates to guide El Shaddai.

Fortunately, some progress is occurring. For instance, the Philippine government and the donor community have incorporated capacity building for the madaris (Islamic schools) in science, maths, computer education and English language training as part of an effort to integrate them into the national educational system. These moves provide devout young Muslim scholars with the skills to become productive members of a globalising and modernising community.

More significantly, interfaith dialogue and peace advocacy are gaining strength. Civil society and religious organisations are working together to resolve conflicts and discrimination by focusing on what unites us – love of God, freedom, community and family. The bishops and ulama (Muslim scholars) have their Bishop-Ulama Forum that meets regularly.

A devout young Muslim wrote to me: "The society where we live now is full of peril. We can no longer live in apathy. We cannot just wait for a miracle to happen. Allah will not change the conditions of our society unless we change it ourselves. …. We have to assert ourselves, and we have to yell to the whole world that we will be what we want to be, because no other than the Muslims themselves know what's best for them."

We need to ask ourselves: do we force these devout, young Muslims towards the path of violent radicalisation through prejudice, ignorance and neglect? Or do we allow them the space to live their lives, accepted as fellow citizens? I, for one, have always believed that the threads of diversity, when accepted and celebrated by the nation, create a beautiful tapestry of its peoples.

###
* Amina Rasul-Bernardo is the lead convener of the Philippine Council for Islam and Democracy. This is the fourth of six articles in a series on religious revivalism and Muslim-Western relations commissioned by the Common Ground News Service (www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 3 October 2006, www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

2) ~YOUTH VIEWS~ What else did the Pope say
Johnathon Barker

Washington, D.C. - The central problem associated with dialogue between the Western and Muslim worlds today is that what passes for dialogue is a predictable pattern of offence-apology-new offence. On the one side, the West (and usually only the US) fights radical Islamic terrorists, possibly invading a country or two and causing mass destruction while decrying extremism, while ministers in countries like Britain go to Muslim neighbourhoods to urge parents to turn in “radical” youngsters. On the other side, a Western cultural symbol (newspaper editor, political or cultural leader, or most recently, an opera house) inadvertently or purposefully does something to offend Muslims, setting off a new wave of hand-wringing, apologies and calls for dialogue.

At some point, the sound-bites have to stop and real conversation must begin. Or we must admit that conversation is impossible, our conceptions of the world so dramatically different that we should simply concentrate on drawing up rules of international behaviour that respect other cultures and religions. Unfortunately today, it is easier than ever to take offence at something happening in another part of the world, at speeches, like the Pope’s, which are not even addressed to us individually, or possibly even our culture. Apparently, since instantly accessing information anywhere is a given, protesting about anything and everything, even though our understanding of the context is thin and its actual relevance to us is low, is the rule du jour. This question – how to have a true dialogue and what the preconditions are – is at the heart of the Pope’s remarks, however, and have been more or less left un-discussed.

Much has been made about the Pope’s quotation of one of the last Byzantine emperors’ conversation with a Persian scholar about the justification of forced conversion, and some scholars have pointed out the Pope’s lack of knowledge of the Qur’an and Islam. What the Pope is critiquing, among other things in this rather dense piece, is something altogether more subtle, a lack of effort in the Western world, as well as in inter-cultural dialogue, to bring reason and faith together. The Pope’s intended use of this quote is not to criticise Islam for forced conversions, but to discuss the philosophical concept of joining reason and faith.

Beyond the controversial quote, the Pope uses the rest of his speech to discuss the Hellenic aspects of Christianity that culminated in the Byzantine emperor employing the argument, with his Muslim interlocutor, that God was Logos which, in the Pope’s view, means the original Word, the undifferentiated and unified plane of human faith and reason. Thus, unreasonable actions could not be sanctified by God. Christianity eventually tried to rid itself of its Hellenic reason, however, and the Pope describes the resulting de-Hellenisation of Christianity that is still occurring today, and also runs through the critique of Western rationality that has also happened as a result. The Pope however, takes issue with the supposedly firm division between reason and faith that has occurred since the Enlightenment in the West, arguing that Christianity and Western reason are intermingled and that separation is impossible.

The Pope then defends cultures which argue that Western rationality excludes them, which would, if the Pope’s interpretation of Islam is to be trusted, include Islam with its notion that God is quite beyond human conceptions of reasonable or unreasonable behaviour, and thus not constrained by them. As both religious figures and post-structuralist academics have pointed out, Western rationalism (or more specifically, positivism) has, as a result of its ethnocentrism, also been responsible for such horrors as colonialism and slavery, among others. By itself, it is no means to an end. As a result, the Pope argues that “a reason which is deaf to the divine and which relegates religion into the realm of subcultures is incapable of entering into the dialogue of cultures.”

At the same time, it’s equally clear the Pope largely agrees with the Byzantine that forced conversion is inimical to both religion and reason, and goes on to invite members of other cultures to join in dialogue with Christians in a spirit of Logos, or reason plus faith. Is such a dialogue possible? Only if all sides agree that Logos is universal, and not simply a Western construct. For fundamentalists guided only by faith, who do not admit the validity of reason, as well as for those positivists who refuse to address the questions of faith, it is not. For better or worse, the questions the Pope has raised are both provocative and of the utmost importance – and it is vital that both Muslim and Western (including Christian) thinkers turn their attention to them as a common vocabulary, a basic ontology, must be agreed on for serious dialogue to even commence.

###
* Johnathon Barker is a graduate student of English at George Washington University. 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), 3 October 2006, www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

3) Bring Islam down to Earth
Choirul Mahfud

Surabaya, Indonesia – British Prime Minister Tony Blair recently visited Indonesia to promote better bilateral cooperation between the two countries. In addition to this agenda, his visit was also intended to encourage dialogue between the British government and Muslim leaders in Indonesia.

Dialogue between the Muslim world and the West is indeed necessary and has been gaining momentum since the 9/11 attacks. Blair described Indonesia as a "crucial partner" in ensuring greater understanding between people of different faiths. It isn’t only because Indonesia has the largest Muslim population in the world, but also because both countries have suffered from terrorism and have a common interest in defeating it.

Indonesia is the first developing country that was blown over by the wind of global terrorism. Only one year after the 9/11 attacks, this country wept for the tragedy of the first Bali bombings. The country has also faced a rise in fundamentalism and the resulting intergroup or interpersonal conflicts since the birth of the Reformation Era in 1998, after President Suharto stood down in response to a wave of protests calling for democracy.

Realizing that the situation is critical, some Indonesian Muslim leaders and intellectuals shared their understanding of the roots of Muslim-Western discord at a recent seminar at Airlangga University, entitled "Islam and the West: Building Inter-Civilization Dialogue". Achmad Syafi'i Ma'arif , the former chairman of Muhammadiyah - a large, Islamic non-profit organization in Indonesia - believes that existing conflicts between the Muslim world and the West are due to the former having fallen behind the West in “the race of civilizations”, or our post-Enlightenment global hierarchy. He adds, however, that a widespread misinterpretation of Islamic teachings is also to blame.

The Director of the Institute of Progressive Islamic Studies (LSIP) in Jakarta, Zuhairi Misrawi, maintains that the clash between Islam and the West can be traced back to stories and stereotypes derived from historical confrontations, such as the Crusades. He attributes this to a lack of knowledge about the fundamental theology and moral principles of both Islam and Christianity, and to an economic and political imbalance between the Muslim world and the West. These factors, says Misrawi, should in reality act as grounds for dialogue and for more assimilation between the two conflicting sides. And indeed, in today’s interconnected and therefore smaller world, it is difficult for Islam and the West to avoid each other. They can't help but bump into each other.

Both Muslim and Western societies have contributed to any clash of civilizations they may be experiencing, and so both must contribute for a meaningful dialogue of civilizations to occur. But for dialogue to be an option, both parties must face and accept their differences. The West has no right to subject Muslims to its way of thinking or ideologies. And Muslims have no right to impose Islamic teachings on the West. If dialogue is going to happen, both parties need to learn how to sit and talk.

A similar challenge confronts Indonesia, where a debate is taking place over the implementation of Islamic law. There are two conflicting approaches. Those who do not support the implementation of Islamic law argue that Indonesia is a multi-religious and multicultural country, where each faith has different and unique values: for this group, only universal values that are shared by each religion, such as justice, empowerment and egalitarianism, must be maintained. The supporters of the implementation of Islamic law, on the other hand, want Islamic law to control and counteract the existing governing system, which has adopted a secularist, liberal-capitalist ideology.

Despite sharing the same goal, namely the realization of social justice, the approach can be very polarizing. One wants to achieve the goal by formalizing Islamic laws and the other cares more for the implementation of these laws in essence.

Demographically speaking, we Muslims may be “entitled” to more than others since we do represent the majority. Should we choose to, we could obtain what we wanted through a simple vote. However, in a multicultural society, such behaviour would put non-Muslims in a precarious position. The question is: do we really want to do this?

Unfortunately, there are many Muslim groups in Indonesia which feel that based on numbers alone, they should be able to implement the laws they choose. They tend to be “religious in statistics." Many incidents demonstrate how "statistics" are exploited to demand things. Claiming to stem from the majority, these groups demand the formalization of Islamic laws, like the use of the scarf, for example. To some extent, one of the primary causes of various religious incidents in Indonesia begins with the superiority of the statistic.

But there are implications of this numbers-based approach. Groups can engage in what Pierre Bourdieu coined “symbolic violence” in his book, Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture (1970). Symbolic violence occurs when a certain group forces its symbols and value systems (such as religion) onto another group. Legitimization of the majority is often an effective weapon of this effort, shifting the balance so that power relations are not perceived objectively, but as a natural order.

It is time for Muslims all over the world, particularly in Indonesia, to leave behind the numbers-based religious model, and begin to demonstrate religiosity. This requires bringing Islam down to earth - upholding amr ma'ruf, nahi munkar (enjoying what is just, forbidding what is wrong): being polite, defending the oppressed, helping the poor, rejecting violence, fighting corruption and terrorism, and spreading peace throughout their country, and the world.

###
* The writer is Executive Director of the Institute for Religion and Social Studies (LKAS) Surabaya, Muhammadiyah University of Surabaya lecturer in Islamic studies, and writer of Socialist Islam and Multicultural Education.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 3 October 2006, www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

4) Reclaiming dignity and hope
Saliba Sarsar & Yehezkel Landau

New Jersey & Connecticut - Our global society is fast losing its balance and its moderate centre. It is becoming more and more polarised and violent. Human life and dignity are losing their sacred character for an increasing number of people, including those who claim to be religious.

The atrocities perpetrated against civilians on September 11, 2001 and since -- the war on terrorism, the horrific slaughter in Iraq, the interminable Arab-Israeli conflict including the latest Israel-Hizbullah war, the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran, the sharp increase in oil prices, even cartoons deemed offensive to religious believers -- all these factors have dashed any hopes that the end of the Cold War and the onset of a new millennium would generate a peace dividend, with greater international stability and prosperity.

Instead we witness more blatant expressions of authoritarianism, tribalism, religious extremism, terrorism and militarism, together with a retreat from responsible politics and multilateral solutions. Ideology eclipses realism. Global organisations and initiatives remain hostage to narrow self-interest. The zero-sum game of power politics imposes its ugliness on our lives, mainly as a fearful, even desperate, reaction to terror.

As private and state terrorism continue to plague the world, they have evoked deep pain and revulsion in our psyches. The struggle against this vicious threat has generated a macro-myth that divides humanity into the "virtuous, righteous, heroic" fighters against the "evildoers". Such de-humanisation simplifies complex problems and leads us away from effective strategies to counter the real threats we face. Whole populations are estranged from each other, waiting for the least provocation to denigrate and attack. Too often the threat is exaggerated, making the response incommensurate with the real danger.

We can easily succumb to despair when we feel helplessly vulnerable in the face of such horrors and threats. Primal survival instincts are apt to trump compassion, ethical restraints, and legal safeguards regarding human rights. Faith turns fanatic, and morality is sacrificed for short-term advantage. Power turns into brute force and evil deeds, and the weak discover their own strength in evil deeds, as well. Words become weapons, truth is warped into falsehood, and the human face dons the mask of death.

Why are we torturing and killing innocent civilians in the name of security or liberation? Why are warriors bombing residential neighbourhoods and houses of worship and despoiling God's creation? Are cartoons mocking prophets and sacred traditions illustrations of free speech or of media insensitivity and irresponsibility? Is denying or belittling the Holocaust and other genocides a result of outright ignorance, or a sad commentary on our inability to face the truth, shoulder responsibility, and demonstrate solidarity with our fellow human beings? Isn't it sinful when civility, honour, and justice are crushed in the name of freedom or security? Isn't it a grotesque distortion of religion when tolerance, caring and forgiveness are violated in the name of the Divine?

While the questions are legion, satisfactory answers elude us. What is clear is that we stand at a crucial juncture in human history, between a "clash of civilisations" and affirming the "dignity of difference".

Choosing the right path requires responsible leadership and a shared commitment to change negative attitudes and behaviours in favour of dialogue, conciliation and a culture of peace. Such transformations must first happen within each one of us and in our interpersonal relationships. We must challenge ourselves, our compatriots and our leaders -- including religious leaders -- to favour compassion over callousness, solidarity over selfishness, and peace with justice over the suppression of dissent.

The Western and Muslim worlds do not have to be like each other, or to even like each other, to embrace dialogue and diplomacy as preferred methods of interaction. Muslims in Western countries can serve as cross-cultural mediators if they are enlisted and trusted by the disputing parties.

Enlightened self-interest and a concern for our children's welfare should suffice as motivations to work toward an accommodation of differences. Westerners and Muslims alike need rational, humane governance and better mutual understanding. Honest engagement with each other will reveal shared values, including a dedication to social justice. We all need political and economic reforms that distribute resources more equitably. We all need to safeguard human rights, increase funding for educational and cultural exchanges, and commit ourselves to resolving conflicts through peaceful means.

Winning the hearts and minds of others, particularly frightened or humiliated peoples, will not be achieved by hard power alone. Investing in peace-building and in basic human needs such as food, medical care, shelter and education instead of high-tech weapons will create the necessary foundation for sustainable change in the direction of moderation, economic equity and true peace. Our hope lies in first imagining, then working to create, an interdependent world in which the good of every individual depends on realising the good of all.

###
* Saliba Sarsar is Professor of political science and Associate Vice President for Academic Program Initiatives at Monmouth University, New Jersey. Yehezkel Landau is Faculty Associate in interfaith relations at Hartford Seminary in Connecticut. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Middle East Times, 25 September 2006, www.metimes.com (http://www.metimes.com)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

5) In Yemen, a first: Arabs observing an Arab election
Oussama K. Safa & Khalil Gebara

Beirut - Amid the setbacks inflicted on democratic progress in the Middle East as a result of recent or ongoing conflicts in Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon, and the threat of religious extremism, heartening news about home-grown democratic initiatives is worth celebrating.

During the triple elections held in Yemen on September 20, a group of reform-minded Arab activists, of which we were part, organised an election observation mission that is bound to become a precedent for anchoring similar inter-Arab democratic practices, and for fostering collective work on democracy. Representing four different countries with a recent tradition for timely elections, Palestinian, Egyptian, Moroccan and Lebanese observers launched the first initiative to observe an Arab election by other Arabs.

Working in parallel with international observers, the Arab delegation received high acclaim from Yemeni civil society and election officials alike, and was shown a warm welcome by the Yemeni authorities. Natives to the region, the Arab observers displayed cultural sensitivity and a wide understanding of the local context as well as the intricacies and nuances of the local language - critical elements missing in outside observers.

The trip also allowed the various electoral actors to discuss their experiences and compare notes on various election processes in the region. Members of the delegation worked in tandem with highly capable Yemeni observers, who displayed unflinching courage and ironclad commitment to ensuring a transparent voting process. To dispel notions of anti-regime bias, members of the delegation held meetings with a variety of political and civil society actors belonging to pro-regime, and to opposition, parties. They also listened carefully to assessments by Yemeni and international civil society organisations.

The delegation was part of a growing critical mass of Arab reformers who insist on blazing the trail and moving forward despite regressions in processes of reform across the Middle East. Members of the Arab delegation were all experienced election monitors and most, if not all, belong to civil society groups and have a long track record of election observation in their own countries and beyond. Their action in Yemen testified to the coming of age of Arab civil society and its increasing capacity to undertake pro-democracy work in neighbouring countries.

The presence of the Arab observers in Yemen was also a strong indication that observation missions need not be foreign-inspired or concocted in Western capitals, nor do election observation missions pose a threat to a country's sovereignty. Such initiatives will always benefit from outside help and assistance, however, and in Yemen's case the delegation was supported by the National Democratic Institute, an American institution. This did not, however, preclude the fact that similar such initiatives are now locally developed and "owned" -- as was the Yemeni one -- and can be added to serious ongoing inter-Arab initiatives such as capacity-building training, advocacy and promotion of good governance programs.

This initiative also sought to reflect the region's interconnectedness and the vast common ground shared by civil society activists in virtually every Arab country. Activists face more or less the same challenges to promoting democracy and are finally pooling their collective efforts to deal with these challenges constructively.

The initiative also proved that such precedents can take place without incurring the wrath of regimes or risking the safety of election observers. Hopefully gone are the days of political oppression and secretive democracy struggles. Arab civil society is here to stay and if anything was shown in the Yemeni experience, it was that this civil society is a mature and reliable stakeholder on the slow but sure journey toward democratic reform.

The Arab delegation has officially become the Arab Initiative for Election Observation and is now in the process of publishing a report on its findings in Yemen. It is also planning to field observer missions for upcoming elections in the region and around the globe. This initiative is worthy of the attention that pro-democracy forces internationally have had for the Middle East's future. It is also a precedent that, if supported and nurtured, will be a shining civil society success for some time to come.

###
* Oussama Safa is general director of the Lebanese Center for Policy Studies. Khalil Gebara is co-executive director of the Lebanese Transparency Association. Both were members of the observer delegation to Yemen. 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, 28 September 2006, www.dailystar.com.lb (http://www.dailystar.com.lb)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

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 Chris Binkley (cbinkley@sfcg.org) for more information on contributing.

About CGNews-PiH
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 constructive, offer hope and promote dialogue and mutual understanding, 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.
The Common Ground News Service also commissions and distributes solution-oriented articles by local and international experts to promote constructive perspectives and encourage dialogue about current Middle East issues. This service, Common Ground News Service - Middle East (CGNews-ME), is available in Arabic, English, and Hebrew. To subscribe, click here. (http://www.sfcg.org/template/lists.cfm?list=cgnews)
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) 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

Email : cgnewspih@sfcg.org
Website : www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/index.php?sid=1&lang=en)

Editors
Emad Khalil (Amman)
Juliette Schmidt (Beirut)
Chris Binkley (Dakar)
Emmanuelle Hazan (Geneva)
Nuruddin Asyhadie (Jakarta)
Leena El-Ali (Washington)
Andrew Kessinger (Washington)

Translators
Olivia Qusaibaty (Washington)
Rio Rinaldo (Jakarta)
Zeina Safa (Beirut)

CGNews is a not-for-profit news service.

Posted by Evelin at October 5, 2006 08:49 AM