Common Ground News Bulletin - 15-21 August 2007
Dear Friends of the HumanDHS network
Please find below the Common Ground News Bulletin - 15-21 August 2007.
Kind regards
Brian Ward
Common Ground News Service
Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
for constructive & vibrant Muslim-Western relations
15 - 21 August 2007
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) Faith in acting: a review of Eboo Patel’s Acts of Faith by Matthew Weiner
Matthew Weiner, program director for the Interfaith Center of New York and a doctoral candidate at Union Theological Seminary, reviews Eboo Patel’s newly published autobiography which discusses the influences that led to his founding the Interfaith Youth Core, an organisation which empowers young Muslims to “change how Americans understand Islam, and how Muslims across the globe understand Islam.”
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 August 2007)
2) ~Youth View~ Face to faith by Samantha Kirby
Samantha Kirby, a native Californian and senior at Northwestern University in Chicago, gives a sincere account of her struggle to reconcile her Jewish faith with a different cultural context during a four-month stay with a Moroccan family in Rabat.
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 August 2007)
3) Legitimate, illegitimate acts of violence by John Esposito
John Esposito, professor of religion and international affairs at Georgetown University and founding director of its Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Centre for Muslim-Christian Understanding, looks at what the Qur’an and senior Muslim religious leaders say about the use of violence. Articulating the many sides of the debate, he concludes thatIslam, like other religions, differentiates between legitimate and illegitimate acts of violence.
(Source: On Faith, 24 July 2007)
4) The limits of multiculturalism: Muslims in Germany by Mark Terkessidis
Mark Terkessidis, a German journalist and author focussing on topics concerning pop culture, migration and racism, argues that multiculturalism in Germany has become a scapegoat and has resulted in an unhealthy focus on religious differences, obscuring real structural problems that are preventing immigrants from participating fully in German society.
(Source: Qantara.de, 3 August 2007)
5) The Amman Message by Prince Ghazi Bin Muhammad
H.R.H. Prince Ghazi, chairman of the Amman Message Committee, looks at a Muslim initiative that addresses “what Islam is and what it is not, and what actions represent it and what actions do not.” He calls for support for the resulting document, the Amman Message, which was borne from a conference of pre-eminent Muslim scholars.
(Source: On Faith, 25 July 2007)
1)Faith in acting: a review of Eboo Patel’s Acts of Faith
Matthew Weiner
NEW YORK CITY - There is a growing phenomenon within the Muslim community in America that will change the history of Islam. Young Muslims, mostly the children of immigrants, are publicly reflecting on their identity. Many are becoming, or have become, Islamic scholars and activists on behalf of a civic Islam. Often, these young men and women were raised in fairly secular households and so as they become self consciously Muslim, they must re-imagine what being Muslim, as Americans, means. Certainly, this growing and internally diverse group will change how Americans understand Islam, and how Muslims across the globe understand Islam. Pay attention.
A star of this group is Eboo Patel. Founder of the Interfaith Youth Core, Patel not only represents this new face of Islam, but he does so specifically by reaching across religious lines. His being Muslim is centrally focused on embracing difference - and what could be more important in this day?
As he tells his story, it is his very encounter with difference that leads him to understand his own faith better, and to become a good Muslim. Patel’s story is an important one if for no other reason that it shows how interfaith initiatives, that is reciprocally working with religious others, need not lead to a kind of religious Esperanto or a purely liberal understanding of religion, but rather can enforce and deepen one’s own faith while building an appreciation of the other.
Patel’s book is at once easy to read and informative. The story line is simple without being simplistic: a young Muslim growing up in Chicago learns that he is different from many around him. Some are good to him, others are racist, and he has a choice about how to deal with this racism: go inward and become racist reactively, or begin working with those different from him in order to make a difference. That could be a tag line for this book because, of course, Patel chooses the latter, and reflects that this choice was perhaps less about him and more about who his parents and teachers were.
For Patel, this becomes the central argument for why we need to foster positive relations with young Muslims in America and around the world. At this heightened point in time, Muslims can go “good” or “bad”, depending on whom they are influenced by. Of course the picture is more complicated, something Patel as an activist-scholar acknowledges. But these are “troubled times”, as the sociologist Anne Swiddler argues. Such times require an intense response. We need heroic figures and Patel, in his young life, is undoubtedly moving in that valuable direction.
Besides being a story of victory for tolerance and embrace, Patel’s story is one of journey, and the narrative line here is again both clear and moving. As Patel self awakens, he travels the globe, meeting the likes of the Dalai Lama and Dr. Ariyaratene (both Buddhists), and is inspired by the likes of Gandhi (a Hindu) and James Baldwin (a Christian and openly gay African American). He likewise rediscovers his own tradition, with such Muslim luminaries as Rumi.
Patel does not spend too much time in his autobiography reflecting in an overt way on the more intolerant side that Islam (as well as all other religions) can manifest, although it is implied. Besides not focusing on Islam gone awry, he also does not focus on defending Islam.
For me, this is another highlight of Patel’s work. Almost everything published about Islam these days is either “pro-Islam” or “anti-Islam” as opposed to a book that looks at Islam in a natural way, finding both the glories and dangers within any lived tradition. Hats off to Patel for refusing to see Islam as an either/or phenomenon, and instead painting a real and complex picture.
This is a book that everyone should read, not just glean from a review. Patel explores the interfaith world, realises a major moral gap in that there is no good setting for youth involvement - because it is youth who are easily swayed to intolerance or fostered to justice - and decides he should create the “Interfaith Youth Core”.
He does, and the rest was just written as history. It is a history worth reading, and I am looking forward to the next chapter.
* Matthew Weiner is the program director for the Interfaith Center of New York, and a doctoral candidate at Union Theological Seminary. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org .
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 August 2007, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
2)~Youth View~ Face to faith
Samantha Kirby
CHICAGO, Illinois - During a recent four-month stay in Morocco, I was faced with the challenge of genuinely adapting to a new and drastically different cultural context. The delicate balance of honesty and selectivity, the issue of disclosure and exposure, was never more in question than during my first encounter with my host brother. After asking my name and birthplace, he inquired if I was religious. My immediate response shook me as the words passed through my lips: “No, not really.”
Before I embarked on my journey to Morocco, friends and family wondered how I would reconcile my Jewish identity with this Muslim society. They wanted to know my strategy for navigating sensitive issues and seemingly inevitable conflicts. I was the least concerned of all; I thought that when the time came, answers would flow. I had faith in the power of cross-cultural exchange to facilitate understanding and dialogue.
Once actually faced with the question of faith, however, my immediate reaction was to hide my Jewish identity.
As time progressed, this suppression became more difficult. Before long, it was Passover and I was faced with a dilemma. It would be impossible to eat with the family in traditional Moroccan style, using bread to scoop food out of the communal tajine (or clay dish), because Jews do not eat leavened breads during Passover.
I had to decide whether to break Passover or finally trust my family with my religious identity. I was terrified that the bonds we had finally formed, despite the communication barriers, would instantly be broken. However, I decided that as people of faith, they would understand the significance of the holiday.
It was time to come out.
I took a deep breath and pulled my host mother, Nezha, into my room. I told her, in my broken Moroccan Arabic, “This week is a holiday for my religion. I don’t eat bread or pastry.” I paused. “Ana yehudia.” I am Jewish.
I showed her my box of matzo, the unleavened bread traditionally eaten during Passover, which I had hidden in my luggage.
She looked at me. The three words she voiced shocked me as much as my own had, but in a radically different way. “Wakha. Meshi mushkill.” Ok. No problem.
Then she disappeared into the kitchen to prepare the late afternoon meal. I exhaled.
When she came out, she brought the usual tray, laden with a silver teapot full of sweet mint tea, bread, jam and butter.
She disappeared again and emerged with something special: a small silver tray, with just two shallow bowls of jam and butter. She placed the tray in front of me, and motioned for me to get my matzo.
In Morocco, I was often inspired by the profound faith surrounding me. But nothing was as inspiring as my family’s instant and unconditional acceptance of my religious identity.
This summer, I am completing an internship at the Interfaith Youth Core (IFYC) in Chicago, Illinois. The IFYC is an organisation working to empower young leaders and bring them together through service work, recognising that shared values such as service and hospitality are common among all religions. We have diverse conversations at the IFYC. They are not about Palestine, Israel and the true nature of God, but about common action for the common good: making the world a better place — one project, one leader, one story at a time.
I intern alongside two Jews, a Christian and a Muslim. We don’t agree on everything, and our meetings can be quite dynamic. But here we are, together, serving at the soup kitchen downstairs. Here we are, together, discussing what it means to be a Christian/Jew/Muslim at age twenty-one.
We are building relationships with each other, so when we engage in challenging conversations, we can walk out of the room together and look forward to our daily lunch hour picnics.
Similarly, in Morocco, though I was initially worried that the bonds with my family would be broken if I were to tell them about my religious identity, it was the relationship we had formed which allowed us to share and observe our respective religions under the same roof.
I waited too long to be honest with my host family. I am ready to engage fully in those difficult conversations for which I used to hold my breath. I am ready to collaborate with my diverse peers to bring a new kind of peace to the world through pluralism.
I won’t wait any longer. I am ready now.
* Samantha Kirby, a native Californian, is a senior at Northwestern University studying religion and psychology. She recently returned from Morocco, where she studied Arabic and Moroccan culture.
This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org .
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 August 2007, www.commongroundnews.org Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
3)Legitimate, illegitimate acts of violence
John Esposito
WASHINGTON - Why is Islam such a violent religion? Does the Qur’an condone acts of terrorism? Why haven’t Muslims denounced the 9/11 attacks and suicide bombing?
Whether in the media or public discussions, these are common and persistent questions. But, in fact, major Muslim religious leaders and Muslim organisations have and do speak out. The media tends not to find these fatwas (religious legal opinions) and statements newsworthy but they are available on the internet.
Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, for example, Muhammad Abdur-Rashid, the most senior Muslim chaplain in the American armed forces, asked for a fatwa about whether American Muslim military could participate in the war in Afghanistan and in other Muslim countries. A group of prominent religious authorities ( http://www.unc.edu/%7Ekurzman/terror.htm) concluded that “All Muslims ought to be united against all those who terrorise the innocents, and those who permit the killing of non-combatants without a justifiable reason” and that it was acceptable “to partake in the fighting in the upcoming battles, against whomever their country decides has perpetrated terrorism against them.”
Islam, like other religions, distinguishes between legitimate and illegitimate acts of violence. The Qur’an does not advocate or condone illegitimate violence or terrorism. The Islamic tradition places extensive limits on the use of violence and rejects terrorism, hijackings and hostage taking. However, Muslims are permitted, indeed at times required, to defend their religion, their families and the Islamic community from aggression.
What about suicide bombers? What about violence against non-combatants? Since the late twentieth century, these issues have resurfaced in Israel-Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Pakistan, Indonesia, America and Europe as suicide bombing has come to be equated with martyrdom, relinquishing one’s life for defence of Islam and the community.
Debates over legitimate versus illegitimate violence have been highlighted by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Prophetic traditions (narrative stories about Muhammad’s words and deeds) clearly and absolutely prohibit suicide because only God has the right to take the life he has granted. Historically, both Sunni and Shi’a Muslims have generally forbidden religious suicide and acts of terrorism.
Suicide attacks, especially those that target innocent civilians or non-combatants, have precipitated a sharp debate among prominent religious authorities in the Muslim world. Sheikh Ahmad Yasin, the late religious leader and founder of Hamas, and Akram Sabri, the Mufti of Jerusalem, as well as many other Arab and Palestinian religious leaders, have argued that suicide bombing is necessary and justified when faced with Israel’s illegal occupation and overwhelming military power.
Others condemn suicide bombings, in particular those that target civilians, as terrorism. The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia condemns all suicide bombing as un-Islamic and forbidden by Islam. Sheikh Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, the former Grand Mufti of Egypt and current Sheikh of al-Azhar, and thus a major religious authority, draws a sharp distinction between suicide bombings that are acts of self-sacrifice and self-defence to defend one’s land and help the oppressed and the killing of non-combatants, women and children, which he has consistently opposed.
A key issue that has emerged in these debates is that of proportionality, that the response or retaliation must be in proportion to the crime committed. Those who seek to justify the killing of civilians argue that in Israel there are no innocent civilians both because Israeli society is a military society (men and women have to serve in the military and continue to serve in the reserves) and because Israeli occupation and policies indiscriminately kill Palestinian civilians.
The debate — what some call the war of fatwas — among religious leaders is reflected in the harsh criticism by Sheikh Yusuf al-Qardawi, whom many regard as the most pre-eminent and influential religious authority in the Arab and Muslim media, of Sheikh Tantawi, who condemned the suicide attack that killed 26 Israelis in December 2001:
“How can the head of Al-Azhar incriminate mujahedin (Islamic fighters) who fight against aggressors? How can he consider these aggressors as innocent civilians? …I am astonished that some sheikhs deliver fatwas that betray the mujahedin, instead of supporting them and urging them to sacrifice and martyrdom.”
Qaradawi also criticised Sheikh Muhammad bin ‘Abdallah as-Sabil, the imam of the grand mosque in Mecca, for declaring that killing Israelis is not permissible. Qaradawi declared,
“The Palestinian who blows himself up is a person who is defending his homeland. When he attacks an occupier enemy, he is attacking a legitimate target. This is different from someone who leaves his country and goes to strike a target with which he has no dispute.”
In contrast, Timothy Winter (Sheikh Abdal Hakim Murad) of Cambridge University maintains, “this kind of targeting of civilians, for instance, the aberrant use of terrorist violence is something that really is very new… It hasn’t gained much inroad into the leadership of the religion, but in the masses on the streets, as it were, particularly in very tense, unnatural places like Gaza, the slums of Baghdad and other places, it does have a certain standing unfortunately. And this is the great challenge of the leadership of the religion – how to reassert orthodoxy in the face of a growing groundswell of fundamentalist revolt.”
The point is this. Islam, like other religions, distinguishes between legitimate and illegitimate acts of violence.
* John L. Esposito is professor of religion and international affairs at Georgetown University, founding director of its Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Centre for Muslim-Christian Understanding and author of What Everyone Needs to Know about Islam and Unholy War: Terror in the Name of Islam. This On Faith article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org .
Source: On Faith, 24 July 2007, www.washingtonpost.com/onfaith
Reprinted with permission from On Faith ( www.washingtonpost.com/onfaith), an online conversation on religion on washingtonpost.com and Newsweek.com. (c) Copyright 2007, Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive. All rights Reserved. Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
4)The limits of multiculturalism: Muslims in Germany
Mark Terkessidis
COLOGNE, Germany - Immigrant youth projects in Berlin of the 90s gladly bore names such as “Disco and Doner.” At the time, an effort was made to highlight cultural differences, yet in a manner particularly palatable for the locals. Thus, the doner kebab.
The multiculturalism of those days can justifiably be accused of having its unspoken focus on snack bars and restaurants.
Today, the public mood has changed noticeably. Multiculturalism has become a scapegoat. One frequently hears, and not only from conservative quarters, that its proponents were naïve, and dangerously so. This is because the multicultural model has promoted the emergence of “parallel societies.”
“Integration” is once again the magic formula. What this word exactly means remains to a large extent unclear. If one looks carefully at the debate swirling around the issue of integration, it seems remarkably similar to the incriminating concept of multiculturalism.
In fact, there is now a new multiculturalism that has less to do with culinary pleasures and a great deal more with spiritual matters – religion, or to be more precise, the mosque.
It is not for nothing that the centrally located new mosque in Cologne has taken on national political significance. When discussion turns to the topic of Germany as a country open to immigration, then hardly any other issue receives more attention than that of Islam.
The fate of the “Muslim woman” is a long-running theme. The relationship of Islam to terrorism is a matter of unending debate. And in a specially scheduled “Islamic summit,” the aim is to determine the future role of Muslims in society.
Despite all opposition, the inclusion of Muslims is already settled. They are to be a sort of junior partner to the Christian faiths – not shoulder-to-shoulder, but at least symbolically visible at the architectural level.
As such, Islam is a religion that remains on trial. While Christian churches are regarded as modern and as a part of Germany’s secular society, there are still historical reservations concerning Islam.
“For 1400 years Islam has neglected to pose critical questions and to distance itself from politics,” believes the “Islam critic” Necla Kelek. Muslims are thereby called upon to view blasphemous theatre works or even to organise a reading of Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses in a mosque in Cologne.
It is clear that a double standard is being applied here, as no one would demand that a Catholic parish should invite Church critic Karl-Heinz Deschner to speak.
When all is said and done, the question remains – who is actually referred to by the term “Muslim”? One frequently hears in the media nowadays that there are “some two to three million” Muslims living in Germany. In fact, not even 20% of “Muslims” are organised.
All of the others, even when they are strict atheists, are simply declared to be Muslims. The reverse conclusion is made when stating that the other 80 million inhabitants are Christians living in a Christian country.
The other thing criticised about the multiculturalism of the 1980s is that all of the inhabitants of a country are declared to be representatives of its culture, even though we live in a society that finds itself in an advanced state of de-traditionalisation.
Meanwhile, we have all become representatives of “our” religion. This is, however, similarly far removed from reality. No matter how many successful mega events, such as the Ecumenical Church Day, the Christian churches continue to diminish in importance.
While we are diligently debating the matter of “the Muslims,” a whole series of structural problems are completely hidden from view – and the legal and economic situation of immigrants is of practically no concern.
For example, in recent years the simplification of attaining German citizenship has been burdened with so many immense constraints that fewer and fewer people are eligible – or even want it. There have only been extremely half-hearted attempts to combat discrimination in the area of education.
And with respect to the horrific level of unemployment among immigrants, the “National Integration Plan” only offers an orgy of declarations of intent. Discussion here is of “promoting” a “more intensive commitment” or of “developing a concept.” One will find very little in terms of concrete proposals.
In addition, the specific difficulties of other immigrant groups are completely ignored, such as the extremely high proportion of pupils of Serbian origin attending remedial classes, the educational catastrophe suffered by those of Italian origin, and the over-proportional rate of unemployment among Greek immigrants, despite their high level of education.
Finally, emphasising religious attributes only helps to promote the scenario of a permanent “clash of cultures.” And it is hardly surprising then that such emphasis also affects the perceptions of minorities about themselves.
A number of polls show that people of Turkish origin increasingly characterise themselves as religious, although this self-projection does not correspond with their actual behaviour – the majority still do not attend the mosque.
Looking at the experiences of other countries, such as Britain, a clear conclusion can be drawn – it is not advisable to pursue the current mix of stressing religious differences, continued discrimination, and economic isolation. That is unless one truly desires a “clash of cultures.”
* Mark Terkessidis has a doctorate in psychology and works as a journalist and author focussing on topics concerning pop culture, migration and racism. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org .
Source: Qantara.de, 3 August 2007, www.qantara.de
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.
Translated from the German by John Bergeron
5)The Amman Message
Prince Ghazi Bin Muhammad
AMMAN - Islam today faces many challenges and problems. Perhaps one of the greatest of these is misunderstanding and confusion about the true nature of the religion of Islam amongst Muslims and non-Muslims alike. This has led to erroneous interpretations of Islamic texts and thus illegitimate religious edicts (fatwas) by people who are intellectually and morally unqualified to make them. Correcting this situation through proper understanding of the traditional Islamic texts is thus of profound importance to the future of Islam and Muslims.
To address this issue, King Abdullah II of Jordan and senior Islamic scholars developed the Amman Message, which started as a simple but detailed statement issued in November 2004 in Amman. It described what Islam is and what it is not, and what actions represent it and what actions do not. Its goal was to clarify to the modern world the true nature of Islam and the nature of true Islam.
In 2005 King Abdullah II sent the following three critical questions to 24 of the most senior religious scholars from all around the world representing all the branches and schools of Islam:
(1) Who is a Muslim?
(2) Is it permissible to declare someone an apostate (takfir)?
(3) Who has the right to undertake issuing fatwas (legal rulings)?
Based on the fatwas provided by these great scholars (including the Sheikh Al-Azhar Ayatollah Sistani and Sheikh Qaradawi), in July 2005 King Abdullah II convened an international Islamic conference of 200 of the world’s leading Islamic scholars (orulama) from 50 countries. The scholars unanimously issued a ruling on three fundamental issues, which became known as the ‘Three Points’:
1. They recognised the validity of all eight Mathhabs (legal schools) of Sunni, Shi’a and Ibadhi Islam; of traditional Islamic Theology (Ash’arism); of Islamic Mysticism (Sufism); and of true Salafi thought, and came to a precise definition of who is a Muslim.
2. Based upon this definition they forbade takfir (declarations of another’s apostasy) between Muslims.
3. They set forth the subjective and objective preconditions for the issuing of fatwas, thereby exposing ignorant and illegitimate edicts in the name of Islam.
Over a period of one year, from July 2005 to July 2006, the Three Points were also unanimously adopted by over 500 leading Muslim scholars worldwide.
This document is of the greatest importance because it amounts to a historical, universal and unanimous religious and political consensus (ijma’) of the nation in our day, and a consolidation of traditional, orthodox Islam. It is the first time in over a thousand years that the ummah has formally and specifically come to such a pluralistic mutual inter-recognition that is religiously legally binding on Muslims and that addresses one of the most critical problems facing Muslims today: lack of agreement about what constitutes Islam, and thus lack of agreement about who is a Muslim and what is truly Islamic.
There is nothing essentially new in the Amman Message, nor could there be for it to be truly authentic, for Islam is a religion revealed by God, and therefore not changeable by man. The Amman Message is merely a concrete restatement and crystallisation of the common principles of traditional, orthodox, mainline Islam — in all its traditional schools of thought and law — the Islam to which the vast, overwhelming majority of the world’s approximately 1.4 billion Muslims belong.
With proper awareness, education and understanding of the Amman Message and its Three Points might, God willing, prevent Muslims from being influenced by illegitimate fatwas and from sliding into takfir and terrorism as a visceral overreaction to poverty, injustice and mistakes in Western foreign policy.
Proper awareness of The Amman Message may also, by exposing the illegitimate opinions of radical fundamentalists and terrorists, help prevent calls in the West for hostility against Muslims as such.
The Amman Message is good news not only for Muslims but also for all non-Muslims. It assures balanced Islamic solutions for essential issues like human rights, women’s rights, freedom of religion, legitimate jihad, good citizenship of Muslims in non-Muslim countries, and just and democratic government — all key issues that are essential to world peace and harmony.
In order for the Amman Message not to remain merely a historical agreement on basic principles, various steps are being taken to introduce it through pragmatic and institutional means, such as : (1) inter-Islamic treaties; (2) national and international legislation using the Three Points of the Amman Message to define Islam and forbid takfir; (3) the use of publishing and the multi-media in all their aspects to spread the Amman Message; (4) instituting the teaching of the Amman Message in school curricula and university courses worldwide; and (5) making it part of the training of mosque Imams who would include it in their sermons.
You can help by adding your voice to this unique and historic international Islamic consensus. Add your name to the list of people worldwide that have endorsed and supported the Three Points. Your endorsement of the Amman Message is one way to contribute towards peace in the world.
* H.R.H. Prince Ghazi is chairman of the Amman Message Committee. The Amman Message can be found online at www.ammanmessage.com . This abridged article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service ( www.commongroundnews.org) with permission from On Faith ( www.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/), an online conversation on religion on washingtonpost.com and Newsweek.com.
Source: On Faith, 24 July 2007, www.washingtonpost.com/onfaith
Reprinted with permission from On Faith ( www.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/), an online conversation on religion on washingtonpost.com and Newsweek.com. (c) Copyright 2007, Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive. All rights Reserved.
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 British, Norwegian, Swedish and US Governments, the United States Institute of Peace, the National Endowment for Democracy and private donors, the service is a non-profit initiative of Search for Common Ground, an international NGO working in the fields of conflict transformation and media production.
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.
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
Editors
Leena El-Ali (Washington)
Juliette Schmidt (Canada)
Rami Assali (Jerusalem)
Diya Agha (Washington)
Emmanuelle Hazan (Geneva)
Nuruddin Asyhadie (Jakarta)
Andrew Kessinger (Washington)
Translators
Françoise Globa (Geneva)
Rio Rinaldo (Jakarta)
Azmi Tubbeh (Washington)