Dear HumanDHS network friends
Please find below the Common Ground News Bulletin: 17-23 June 2008.
Kind regards
Brian Ward
Common Ground News Bulletin: 17-23 June 2008
Visit our website at www.commongroundnews.org
Inside this edition 17 - 23 June 2008
African American Muslims refute the clash of civilisations
by Dawud Walid
Dawud Walid, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Michigan, considers how African American Muslims serve as an example that violence between the West and Muslim communities is not inevitable.
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 17 June 2008)
Muslim world speaks out on Obama
by Yasser Khalil
Egyptian researcher and journalist Yasser Khalil explains the growing support for Obama in the Arab and Muslim world.
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 17 June 2008)
Saudis call for dialogue
by Asma Hanif
In light of the Muslim intrafaith conference in Mecca last week, freelance journalist Asma Hanif considers Saudi Arabia’s steps toward correcting global misperceptions about Islam.
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 17 June 2008)
Preparing for peace in Pakistan
by Mehlaqa Samdani
Has there been progress in fighting terrorism along the Pakistani-Afghan border? Mehlaqa Samdani, an advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, assesses local government efforts to engage the country’s militants in dialogue and asks how the United States can support peace talks while concurrently preserving its security interests in the region.
(Source: Foreign Policy In Focus, 17 June 2008)
Civilisations meet online
by Faisal Abbas
Faisal Abbas, media editor of the London-based paper, Asharq al-Awsat, examines how today’s web-based tools, such as Facebook, blogs and YouTube, play an influential role in the world of politics, and serve as outreach mechanisms between the Muslim world and the West.
(Source: Asharq Al-Awsat, 9 June 2008)
African American Muslims refute the clash of civilisations
Dawud Walid
Southfield, Michigan - Serving as a point of departure from the so-called “clash of civilisations”, African American Muslims counter the claim that hostility is inevitable between Westerners and Muslims. Having barely any historical connections to outside modern nation states, African American Muslims have been entirely formed by the American experience; indeed, their “American-ness” is beyond challenge. And yet they are completely Muslim.
African American Muslims have roots in America that are four centuries old. They provide the larger Muslim American community with a unique connection to the West that is generally lacking in European Muslim communities. This connectivity offers a supportive narrative to all Muslims in America, and provides the African American community with an active role in bridging the gap between the West and the Muslim world.
Unlike Muslims that have migrated to Europe, Muslim Americans form a substantial indigenous demographic. This population, which is overwhelmingly African American, has an irrefutable connection with America. While the institution of slavery sought to erase religions, languages and cultural practices, African American Muslim heritage has been preserved through its historic contribution to freedom, justice and equality.
The role that African Americans have forged for themselves has benefited all Americans ? and in fact the entire globe. Their struggles, notably during the Civil Rights movement, paved the way for a practice of Islam in America that is not found in other Western nations and even in some Muslim majority nations. For example, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave Muslims the right to attend Friday prayer services and gave women the right to wear the headscarf at their places of employment and schools.
The Civil Rights Act does not allow an employer the right “to limit, segregate, or classify his employees in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, colour, religion, sex, or national origin.” (Section 703.(a).(2))
The same movement further challenged America to address the social ills of white supremacy and opened the door for the Immigration Act of 1965, which had the residual effect of greatly increasing the number of Muslims in America from South Asia.
The American Muslim community has benefited from the majority of its members belonging to the African American community, a group that embodies America’s consciousness regarding civil and human rights. The increased recognition of the importance of this demographic within the American Muslim community may be recent, yet its value has long preceded the realisation.
>From America’s first Muslim judge and Detroit’s first Muslim Deputy Mayor, Adam Shakoor, to America’s first two Muslim congressmen, Keith Ellison (D-MN) and Andre Carson (D-IN), Muslims ? domestically and internationally ? have been empowered by pioneering African Americans. The tangible benefits, such as introducing domestic legislation that takes into account Muslim concerns and voting with greater understanding than the average American congressman on issues relating to the Muslim world, are obvious.
The greater reward to Muslims, therefore, is that of hope.
If these Muslims have overcome the experience of marginalisation to hold elected offices in America, then perhaps all American Muslims have the same potential. Muslims in Africa, Asia and Europe can hold strong to the idea that if Muslim descendants of American slaves can be respected in broader American society, then perhaps America can undergo a healthy reform in its foreign policy and assess the Muslim world with a more balanced eye.
The Jeffersonian idea that “all men are created equal… endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”, has an exceptionally strong following among African American Muslims. With this rich history and historical legitimacy as Americans, African American Muslims will continue to be a vital ingredient in cultivating a better life for Muslims throughout America and will continue to serve as a spiritual link between America and the Muslim world.
###
* Dawud Walid is the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations – Michigan (CAIR-MI) and Assistant Imam of Masjid Wali Muhammad in Detroit, Michigan. This article is part of a series on African American Muslims written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org .
Source: Common Ground News Service, 17 June 2008, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.
Return to top
Muslim world speaks out on Obama
Yasser Khalil
Cairo - US Senator Barack Obama represents a phenomenon that has drawn global attention and captivated the minds of Muslims around the world as he wages a spirited campaign to become the next president of the United States. In spite of the campaign’s heated debate and some controversial rhetoric regarding Islam, large segments of Muslims remain fascinated with the election and have become big fans of Obama.
This level of support for an American presidential candidate is unprecedented in the Muslim world. The fact that it comes amidst an almost unanimous feeling of indignation and rage towards US foreign policy – particularly in Iraq and Palestine – makes it even more noteworthy.
The simple explanation is that many Muslims see new reason for hope in the political approach of Obama and his advisors. His apparent eagerness to rally more international support for US policy, and even talk to America’s “enemies”, is cause for optimism. Imagine what global politics might look like in Iraq, or Sudan, or Afghanistan, if Obama-like vision had influenced US leadership earlier.
As an Arab Muslim in Egypt who is affected by US foreign policy, I believe an Obama approach may help solve the accumulated problems between Muslims and the United States that have become more aggravated since the September 11 terrorist attacks. New and more creative techniques for dealing with extremists instead of the controversial methods used by the current US administration could also stop giving Al Qaeda and other such groups the pretext for recruiting new members. Then, perhaps, extremists would lose the arguments that fuel their criminal machine and lead them to destroy innocent people.
There are, of course, those in the Muslim world who oppose Barack Obama. They argue that US policy will not change with a new president. To them I say that Obama has already proven there’s room to rock the boat; he opposed the decision to invade Iraq and is making concrete, logical recommendations for withdrawing US troops.
Muslim cynics argue that all American politicians, including Obama, are biased toward Israel at the expense of Arabs. But we must differentiate between a candidate’s support for a Jewish state and an inherent bias toward it. US friendship with Israel doesn’t have to be a threat, especially if it results in taking a more active stance on creating just and fair policies for the rest of the Arab world.
And then there is the apostate debate. When Obama was described as a potential Muslim apostate, many Muslims reacted with bewilderment and curiosity. Obama has said he was never a Muslim in the first place, yet some people considered him to be one through his father. But to me, it’s clear that Islam is a free choice, not a hereditary imposition.
Other internet campaigns exploited Obama’s alleged Muslim links by portraying America as a “racist country” whose citizens and politicians would never permit Obama to win because he is black and has Muslim roots. The effort was misleading, but nonetheless garnered the candidate even more sympathy in the Muslim world.
Obama’s denial of being a Muslim does not mean that he sees it as an accusation; instead, he is distancing himself from charges of deceit and hypocrisy. It’s time to move on from these unnecessary debates and judge this promising presidential candidate on his political visions and ability to balance global Muslim interests with those of his constituencies and friends.
By embracing dialogue with Muslim countries such as Syria and Iran, and jumpstarting US diplomatic efforts, Obama will open doors that have been shut – and bolted – in recent years. It is in the interest of all Muslim countries that the US president have such a constructive approach, even while maintaining a high degree of friendship with Israel and powers supporting it in the United States and abroad. In pursuing rational, inclusive and creative politics, Obama can remain effective while still overcoming obstacles that impede the path of global peace and co-existence.
###
* Yasser Khalil is an Egyptian researcher and journalist. This article, translated from Arabic, was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and originally appeared in the Christian Science Monitor.
Source: Common Ground News Service, 17 June 2008, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.
Return to top
Saudis call for dialogue
Asma Hanif
Brussels - Saudi Arabia’s call for an ongoing interfaith dialogue has raised a few eyebrows in the West.
The kingdom has long been perceived as a piece of desert ruled by an ultra conservative clergy with radical interpretations of Islam. Women are oppressed, it is often alleged; Wahhabi scholars want to convert the world over; and non-Muslims are banned from practicing their faith on Saudi soil – among other claims.
My Saudi friend calls these sheer misperceptions. “We are a people like all others in the world,” she says. “We support reform, respect human values, and cherish modernity.”
Incidentally, she – like other religious Saudi women – seems to enjoy her life as much as any of my Western female friends. Their conservative interpretation of Islam does not prevent education, shopping, fashion and parties from being part of their lives.
Refuting allegations levelled against Islam and Muslims – including Saudi society – is the major aim of ongoing interfaith dialogue. The “Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques”, as the King is called in Saudi Arabia, seems to feel a special commitment towards Islam.
Earlier this month the King inaugurated a three-day conference in Mecca aimed at promoting future interfaith dialogue with non-Muslims. He told the all-Muslim audience, “You have gathered today to tell the whole world that (…) we are a voice of justice and human values, that we are a voice for coexistence and a just and rational dialogue.”
Last November, King Abdullah made history when meeting with Pope Benedict XVI in the Vatican, and this month, the Sunni monarch appeared next to Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani, former president of mainly Shi’a Iran, in a symbolic gesture to encourage Muslim unity.
Such moves can be seen as part of a wider adaptation of Saudi Arabia’s clergy to modern life. The first of its kind to stem from Saudi Arabia, the conference conveyed an important message: interfaith dialogue does not defy any religious principle. In fact, it is considered a basic element of Islam. Excerpts of both the Qur’an and the sunnah (the traditions of Prophet Muhammad) were cited to underline its importance.
The country’s Grand Mufti, Abdul Aziz Al-Sheikh, stressed that religion encourages accommodation to modern life. “We live in a communication era,” he said. “To adapt to it by holding dialogue and correspondence among humankind has become an obligation.”
There is no doubt that the commitment to engage in interfaith dialogue took extra effort in Saudi Arabia, due to suspicious stances that the Saudi clergy now seems to have overcome. Hassan Al-Ahdal, director of media and relations at the World Muslim League, relates this reluctance to the fear of ending up with a “one world religion” to the detriment of each religion’s teaching.
But this conference made it clear that the goal is not to compromise on any faith’s principles. “The priority is to agree on common values without tackling religious matters because these are always ground for dispute,” Al-Ahdal says. “No side will ever succeed in changing the other.”
The country’s Grand Mufti is in support of the interfaith talks, claiming “dawah” as the ultimate goal of engaging in dialogue. Although dawah is occasionally used in the Qur’an to signify preaching with the goal of conversion, it literally means “invitation”, and can be used to invite others to understand Islam. “Disparity between people is unquestionable,” he also said. “It is natural that people differ in behaviour, language, colour and intelligence. The Qur’an acknowledges that.”
While no definite timetable was yet issued for the Muslim-Christian-Jewish interfaith talks, the Muslim participants last week set up a strategy for dialogue, and agreed on establishing bodies to foster academic dialogue such as the King Abdullah Ibn Abdul Aziz International Centre for Civilisational Interaction, and the creation of the King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Award for Civilisation Dialogue.
It is not yet clear whether King Abdullah intends, through his forums, to solve political conflicts in the long term, but at present politics should be kept out of the agenda.
The key priority of this dialogue – to invite people of all faiths, and particularly Judeo-Christians in the West, to join with Muslims to rationally judge whether mutual suspicions are justified – ought to raise hopes instead of eyebrows.
###
* Asma Hanif is a Brussels-based freelance journalist focusing on the intersection of religion and politics. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org .
Source: Common Ground News Service, 17 June 2008, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.
Return to top
Preparing for peace in Pakistan
Mehlaqa Samdani
Pittsfield, Massachusetts - Criticism has been levelled against the Pakistani government’s efforts to hold talks with militant groups. While concerns about the Taliban regrouping remain valid, it is in America’s long-term security interest not only to support the multidimensional peace plans being formulated, but also to refrain from words and actions which could jeopardize the process. The devastating air strikes that killed 11 Pakistani soldiers in the Mohmand Agency are the most recent case in point.
Immediately after the February general elections, the Pakistani government launched peace talks with militants in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). On 21 May, the Frontier government, led by the secular Awami National Party (ANP), signed a comprehensive peace deal with militants associated with the Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP) in NWFP. The provincial government agreed to the imposition of shari’a in NWFP’s Malakand division while the local Taliban vowed to respect the writ of the state, hand foreign militants over to the government and renounce militancy.
At the federal level, talks continue between the government and the TTP and have led to prisoner exchanges and the re-orientation of army positions to facilitate the return of displaced people to the region.
While Pakistanis have welcomed the peace initiatives, the US has expressed reservations. It is critical for the US to recognise that the priority of the Pakistani government should be to first bring peace and stability within its own borders. If the new leadership is seen to place the interests of the United States before its own, it will experience the same legitimacy problems Musharraf faced. This will undermine Pakistan’s democratic transition, creating instability in the country and the region.
If negotiations fail because of militant uprisings, Pakistanis will support the use of force knowing all other channels were exhausted. This will lead to greater public ownership of the fight against extremism, something the United States has called for.
Pakistan’s government recognises the need for a regional strategy to consolidate the tenuous peace achieved in Pakistan. But it also believes in an incremental approach. Once it has established a working relationship with local Taliban, the Pakistani government could potentially facilitate talks between NATO, the Afghan Taliban and the Afghan government.
In recent months NATO allies and the Afghan government (despite Karzai’s recent threat to go after the Pakistani Taliban in FATA) have exhibited battle fatigue and seem willing to talk to moderate Taliban members. The ANP have relied on elements of the Pakhtoonwali (tribal code) to reach out to Pashtun militants and could invoke similar traditions across the border. Also, the ANP enjoy close ties with the Karzai government and last year sponsored a regional peace jirga (tribal assembly of elders) in Kabul. A similar jirga, this time around with NATO troops and moderate Taliban factions from both sides of the border could prove to be an effective step forward.
So how can the United States support peace talks and also preserve its security interests in the region?
First, the United States must refrain from drone attacks on Pakistani territory during peace negotiations. The recent airs strikes in Mohmand and Damadola that killed both civilians and soldiers reminded Pakistanis of a similar drone strike in January 2006, which occurred on the eve of a peace deal that was to be signed between government forces and the Taliban.
In Pakistan these attacks are seen as a direct attempt to sabotage the peace process, result in calls for revenge against the United States and invite retaliatory attacks within Pakistan’s settled areas. None of these outcomes bode well for peace in the region.
Second, the United States should encourage the immediate resumption of high-level coordination meetings between Pakistan, NATO and Afghanistan — of which the last three were delayed due to Pakistan’s political transition and internal negotiations.
At the same time, the United States should urge the Pakistani government to develop joint monitoring mechanisms with Taliban peace signatories so as to ensure compliance. Consequences for violations should also be defined.
Also, extending financial support to the $4 billion peace plan being proposed by the NWFP government would bode well for Pakistan-US relations. The plan seeks to reduce militancy in the Frontier by expanding the police force, establishing regional religious peace conferences, setting up a rural fund and generating employment through the implementation of infrastructure projects.
Finally, the United States should call for improved lines of communication between Pakistan’s federal and provincial negotiating teams which lack a coherent strategy. The federal government has mostly excluded the provincial government from talks with militants in FATA. Thus, the provincial government cannot hold TTP members in the Frontier accountable if violations occur by their counterparts in the tribal belt.
This has led one official to observe that while the TTP have somewhat of a unified command structure across FATA and the NWFP, the government appears divided, giving the militants an edge.
This is a critical time for Pakistan as it pursues a homegrown strategy to fight extremism. Rather than undermine the approach, the United States would do well to bolster it in a way that would serve its long-term security interests in both Pakistan and the region.
###
* Mehlaqa Samdani is an advisor to the Post-Conflict Reconstruction Project (PCR Project) at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org .
Source: Foreign Policy In Focus. 13 June 2008, www.fpif.org .
This article was published by Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF), a project of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS, online at www.ips-dc.org ). Copyright permission is granted for publication.
Return to top
Civilisations meet online
Faisal Abbas
London - While campaigning for his first term as US President, Bill Clinton made headlines when he made a guest appearance on MTV in 1992 in an effort to court the American youth vote.
The appearance was regarded as a historical landmark in the relationship between politicians and the media.
With today’s technology, Clinton would likely also have had his own blog, Facebook page and YouTube channel. Such revolutionary applications have developed the Internet into a primary democratic medium, allowing audiences to instantly and directly communicate with leaders without any geographic or time barriers.
Queen Rania of Jordan, a guest of honour at the recent Google Zeitgeist Conference in mid-June in London, launched her own YouTube channel (www.youtube.com/queenrania) last April.
Queen Rania’s YouTube endeavour is a conscious effort to promote dialogue and understanding between the Arab and Muslim world and the West.
“Arabs and Muslims struggle daily with how the world sees us: our reality, history, and way of thinking. We must break down these stereotypes and speak up for ourselves so that everyone understands who we are, and what we value,” explained Queen Rania.
“Dialogue is the best way to achieve this, and YouTube fosters much needed conversations on tolerance, compassion, and understanding. What I’m seeing on YouTube today is exactly that desired dialogue which at its best dispels old suspicions by forming new communities,” she added.
The Queen will be receiving questions and comments on her channel, which currently has over 5,000 subscribers, until International Youth Day on August 12.
She also emphasised the need to focus on youth: “The YouTube, Facebook and Ikbis generation is fluent in uploading, tagging, and instant messaging, and we must be too. Youth today are the main source of energy and innovation in our region; not only will they erode negative stereotypes, but they will create new companies, new jobs, and new opportunities for Jordan, and the Arab world.”
Various commentators on the Queen’s YouTube channel have expressed harsh language toward Islam and its symbols. Others, however, have attempted to correct inaccuracies and build bridges, including the Queen herself, who has posted a number of videos.
In a recent video, Queen Rania replies to one user’s comment, saying that although she was always good at maths, one doesn’t need such skills to know that the equations “Arab = Muslim =Terror = War” and “Arabs are Muslims and Muslims = Violence” (posted by a particular user) are inaccurate.
Queen Rania calls for “getting the facts straight” before making assumptions, explaining that: “With every line written and video posted, we share our experiences and knowledge which dismantles barriers and brings us together.”
Yasmina Brihi, Marketing Manager of Google (which owns YouTube) for the Middle East and North Africa, says, ” We are delighted to see this engagement online and eagerly anticipate direct dialogue about politics and issues that matter to people around the world.”
This “engagement” has been evident in the recent coverage of the US Presidential elections. The first CNN/YouTube candidate debates took place this year and displayed the significant potential in the combined use of television and the Internet.
These debates allowed potential voters to send their questions and comments directly to the candidates. Many questions were played live on air for the candidates to answer.
CNN senior vice president and Washington bureau chief David Bohrman said that the debates “really worked and were a success,” and “CNN will continue to experiment with new technologies for the upcoming political conventions and Election Night 2008.”
Brihi explains that YouTube “helps voters be part of the political debate in ways that were not possible before the emergence of online video. People can express their views to those in power, ask questions and be heard, while those in office can use the immediacy of video to highlight their priorities and engage with people on the issues that matter most to them.”
###
* Faisal Abbas is the media editor at Asharq al-Awsat. This abridged article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org . The full text can be found at www.asharqalawsat.com .
Source: Asharq al-Awsat, 9 June 2008, www.asharqalawsat.com
Reprint permission has been provided to the Common Ground News Service. For additional reprint permission please contact the original publication.
HRH Network: Steadfast in Protest - Observatory’s annual report for 2007 is out