The Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) journal has published my article, “Women in Afghanistan: A Human Rights Tragedy a Decade after September 11” –
Also published by the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA), thank you RAWA:
The last couple of weeks have been filled with bad news across the Middle East, South Asia, and even the Caucasus. The sheer destructiveness, outrageous, deplorable behavior, and intolerance manifested in the events are extremely disheartening, to say the least.
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has a real challenge on his hands. Militants have attacked a number of moderate Muslim clerics in the Caucasus, and some have died. The clerics were known to be voices of moderation and criticism against the fanatical militants, who are proliferating in Russia’s southern edges. Reuters reports that in Dagestan, “more than a dozen young men from the village have ‘gone to the forest’ – the local euphemism for joining insurgents in their hideouts, says village administrator Aliaskhab Magomedov.” The reports indicate that these men are hardened Islamists as a result of working in the Gulf Arab states, returning home and spreading their Wahhabi ideology with violence.
Similarly, in two African countries we see Salafist and Al Qaeda-affiliated militants destroying Sufi mosques and shrines. In parts of Libya, they are literally bulldozing heritage sites, not unlike the Taliban’s destruction of the Bamiyan Buddha statues. In Mali, militants have literally chipped away at UNESCO heritage sites with hammers and chisels. These militants also want to target libraries and museums in order to destroy precious archeological icons and manuscripts that they deem “un-Islamic.” When you read Ahmed Rashid’s book on the Taliban, you learn that when the Taliban first came to power in the mid-1990s, and took over Kabul, one of the first institutions they attacked and destroyed were libraries. Nothing has changed, except the geography. Such mentalities still may be among minority fringe groups. Nonetheless, their propensity for violence and destruction is not only horrendous, but also, alarmingly, proliferating in other regions.
Such is the venom of Wahhabi/Salafi ideology, and let’s not forget that the seat of Wahhabism, Saudi Arabia, has long upheld policies for destroying sacred and heritage sites, and carried them out within the kingdom. The Saudis, after all, are one of the creators of the Taliban. That is very telling indeed. In fact, the “League of Libyan Ulema, a group of more than 200 Muslim scholars, on Tuesday evening blamed the attacks on a son of the late dictator Muammar Qaddafi, Saadi, and his Libyan Salafi allies it said were inspired by radical Saudi preachers. Sufi theologian Aref Ali Nayed said Libya had not seen such attacks for centuries. ‘Even Mussolini’s fascists did not treat our spiritual heritage with such contempt,’ he said” (Reuters). Italy under Mussolini occupied Libya until WWII.
While the West is preoccupied with vilifying Iran – and this is not to say that the Iranian regime is not a problem or a threat – we in the West are frighteningly myopic in terms of seeing the big picture: i.e., Salafism / Wahhabism is proving to be even more destructive, violent, intolerant, and hate-mongering on a daily basis than what we see coming from Iran, and not just in words, but also in action. The only thing is that the former is not on the radar, while the latter (Iran) is the object of obsession in the West. That scenario will only lead to repeating costly past mistakes: can we say “Mujahideen” in the Af-Pak region?
The Libyan Ulema and citizens are extremely frustrated with Tripoli’s seemingly inability to stop the Salafi assault on the country’s shrines, mosques, and heritage sites.
“The League of Libyan Ulema (Muslim scholars) urged Tripoli ‘to pressure the government of Saudi Arabia to restrain its clerics who meddle in our affairs’ by training young Libyans in Salafism and spreading the ideology through books and tapes.
It also urged Libyans to protect Sufi sites by force.
Nayed, who lectures at the old Uthman Pasha madrasa that was desecrated on Tuesday evening, said the attackers were ‘Wahhabi hooligans (and) all sorts of pseudo-Salafi elements’ while government security officials were ‘complacent and impotent.’
‘Libya has to make a clear choice – either a Taliban/Shabaab-style religious fanaticism or a true Muslim moral and spiritual civility,’ he told Reuters.”
The Salafists – or, as Nayed pointedly and correctly calls them “Wahhabi hooligans” – are an imminent threat to the stability and security of the regions and sub-regions in which they operate. And, that is exactly their intent, to destabilize, coerce, bully, and terrorize. Although their militant ideologies have been dealt a severe blow since the mostly peaceful 2011 Arab uprisings and revolutions successfully changed regimes in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya, the Wahhabi hooligans also see the same events and outcomes as an opportunity to fill any gaps that may appear in the nation building processes in respective countries. Effective policies and law enforcement are needed to preclude them from gaining even an inch. Think of them as hyenas lurking in the darkness, only now they are audaciously operating in broad daylight.
The other major recent incident is the disgustingly shameful “blasphemy” case in Pakistan, which has landed a young 14-year-old girl with mental disabilities, who happens to be a Christian, in prison. Instead of protecting this child and her family, the Pakistani authorities, in all their hollow wisdom, have thrown her in jail, and might make her stand trial. Blasphemy prosecutions can render death sentences. This has stirred outrage worldwide, and especially among human rights organizations. Perhaps in reaction to the outrage, police arrested the local imam who some claim is the culprit in framing the child. But, this case is about more than just the tragic circumstances of this child, her family, and the Pakistani Christian community at large. This ludicrous behavior by the authorities and even the government, which initially called for “an investigation,” rather than calling for her immediate release, only highlights the moral bankruptcy of Pakistan. The expediency with which the so-called “blasphemy law” is used especially against religious minorities underscores the nakedly transparent bigotry that streams through Pakistan’s fabric. Furthermore, it is not only an example of moral bankruptcy, but it also illustrates the most profound absence of intelligence and reason. Regarding this case, there is no hole deep enough in the sand that would be sufficient for heads to bury themselves in, as far as I’m concerned. I close with a quote by George Orwell:
“One defeats a fanatic precisely by not being a fanatic oneself, but on the contrary, by using one’s intelligence.”
NOTE: Everything I write in this blog constitutes my personal opinions and views
Cell phones banned for girls and women under 40
Here is my latest opinion piece in the Jerusalem Post, “Taliban 2.0: Targeting Women Globally”:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=282679
I would be interested to know what readers think about such decrees (fatwas) being handed down to restrict the rights and freedoms of girls and women in India and elsewhere. Please don’t hesitate to submit your comments. Thanks.
I never thought I’d see it in my lifetime. I lived in Egypt for four years, under Mubarak, and I never would have guessed that within a few years he would be overthrown, and the arch nemesis of the regime, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), would win an election. Yet, it has happened, and after a very long, drawn out, meticulous reading of the election results on Sunday afternoon, which I presume has served as a torture tactic in Egyptian prisons, finally the commission announced MB candidate Mohamed Morsi as the winner of the run-off, beating the former Mubarak PM Ahmed Shafiq. Of course, the real hard work begins now, in dealing with old and new political institutions, the religious establishment, and the demands of the revolutionaries. Plus, external powers will have to be reassured of the preservation of their regional interests. The status quo persistently lurks in the shadows.
In my opinion, neither Shafiq nor Morsi were good candidates for a progressive future. The former represents the Mubarak regime, and the latter’s religious platform generates apprehension especially among many women, religious minorities (i.e., the Coptic Christians), the revolutionary youth movement, and secularists and moderates. Morsi inherits an unenviable task and circumstance, although anyone in his shoes would have faced similar daunting challenges.
Some of the pressing priorities and challenges awaiting him are worth reviewing:
Economic challenges:
This is by far the number one priority and challenge that Morsi faces. Tourism has been hit hard since the 2011 revolution, and businesses and industries have suffered losses. Labor disputes have erupted, and in fact a labor dispute is what started the whole revolutionary movement (April 6th youth movement). Getting the economic engine going and in fact getting it to surpass previous growth levels will be analogous to climbing Everest ten times. But, that is what’s needed. Going back to pre-revolution economic status will not be sufficient. For this to occur, the Egyptian economy will have to open up and diversify significantly, plus simultaneous advances in education and training (including technological training) must be implemented. Given the meager literacy rates in Egypt (males 77%; females 62%), that alone will be a formidable challenge.
Political challenges:
There is already talk about SCAF setting a trap for Morsi, especially given that the constitution has yet to be written. The political challenges are immense, and the uncertainties regarding SCAF’s agendas are great cause for concern. Morsi will have to tread with extraordinary political savvy, and his lack of previous political experience already renders him politically handicapped. He will need the most politically shrewd and skilled circle of advisers around him. How likely that is remains to be seen.
Ideological challenges:
Internal ideological challenges within the MB, but also involving the religious establishment, will create factionalism and could engender indecision and/or poor social policies. If Morsi gives in to pressures for instituting strict Islamist policies, many aspects of socioeconomic development and human rights can be seriously derailed and undermined. Another ideological challenge is the impact of regional developments, mainly what’s happening in Syria, which in reality symbolizes the Sunni-Shi’ite rivalry (i.e., Asad’s alliance with Iran and Hezbollah). Although Morsi has already expressed improving relations with Iran, the Syrian conflict, along with a possible US-Israeli military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, could escalate the sectarian tensions in the region. In that scenario, Egypt will be compelled to side with the status quo.
Regional challenges:
Israel is the number one regional relations issue for Egypt, and Morsi’s position regarding the Camp David Accords will be greatly scrutinized especially by Western powers. In addition, instability in Libya next door may have an impact on political and security issues in Egypt, not to mention the problems in Sudan. Floods of refugees into Egypt have long caused pressures on the local economy, and with continuing conflicts in these neighboring states, it could worsen. Morsi says he wants to improve relations with Iran. Given Iran’s support for the Asad regime in Syria, this might not prove a popular stance domestically, but it is still a step in the right direction, since Egyptian-Iranian relations have remained strained for years. Who knows, at some point maybe Egypt could play a significant role in diplomacy involving Iran and her adversaries in the region and also in the West. If Egypt can rise once again as a major regional player, then that will truly be a huge feather in Morsi’s cap.
External foreign relations challenges:
Egypt’s relations with the US and other Western powers will be critical for her socioeconomic development. The caveat in this is the gauntlet laid down by SCAF, much of which remains unknown, in terms of treading that path smoothly in the transition process. So far, the US has congratulated Morsi upon his win. But, that does not mean that he will not be viewed with skeptical eyes and heavy scrutiny. Moreover, he risks undermining his own credibility if he starts to wave the Islamist flag a bit too fervently. Morsi and his government will have to maintain a delicate balance between Islamism and democracy, and along those lines, the “Turkish model” of the AKP has been repeatedly cited. Morsi and company will remain under the microscope for a long time.
Morsi will face many pressures and temptations to invoke and perhaps implement stricter Islamic rules and policies in post-Mubarak Egypt. If he leans more towards such matters and issues, then it will be an indication of his lack of focus on the real priorities of the country, those that pertain to socioeconomic development and progress, alleviating poverty and illiteracy, and improving the quality of life for the masses.
If other Islamist parties/organizations are any indication of the direction that they are inclined to take, for example Hamas and Hezbollah, then there is every reason to be skeptical about the MB in Egypt. Islamist groups in the region have failed miserably to illustrate a keen capability to govern effectively and uphold fundamental human rights. In the end, the successes of Islamist parties may render the region a bastion of Islamism, but with nothing substantive to show for it. Let’s see if they can prove the skeptics wrong.
NOTE: Everything I write in this blog constitutes my personal opinions and views
PLEASE READ this piece by Mona Eltahawy in Foreign Policy Magazine… It’s provocative and extremely important:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/23/why_do_they_hate_us?page=0,1
Pakistan is not the only country that is debating the nature of its national identity, as religious or secular, but the intensity of its internal divisions has been cause for worry for a long time now. The mullah-versus-secularist rivalry is truly a fight for rights and freedoms, and the right to live without religious bullying. To be fair, most of the Middle Eastern dictators who have shown their ruthless authoritarianism have ruled “secular” states, but the vicious and violent totalitarian religious theocracies of Saudi Arabia and Iran are no less brutal.
The ambiguity and subjectivity of calls for “implementing Shariah” make me extremely apprehensive, whether it’s in Pakistan, parts of Nigeria, Somalia, Egypt, Tunisia, or even in the US. I have asked people what they mean by wanting Shariah in the US, for example, and I never get an answer. This is very alarming. Even the silence itself is cause for concern.
A young Pakistani economist has this to say about the matter, which I am sure will spur further debate … take a look:
http://dawn.com/2012/04/09/en-route-to-secularism/
I vote for neither Shariah nor secularism, but I embrace humanism. Too many grandiose claims have been made by all these “ism’s” that have only proven to be the worst violators of human rights. Isn’t it about time that the world embraces the “human” in human rights?
NOTE: Everything I write in this blog constitutes my personal opinions and views.
When I lived in Damascus, at the time the TV had only two channels. One of them used to broadcast Russian ballet performances quite regularly. Also, Iranian pilgrims were everywhere. An entire segment of the Syrian tourist industry has been set aside just for Iranian pilgrims visiting important Shia shrines. I saw busloads, and I even learned that certain hotels were exclusively serving Iranian patrons.
So, the official public UN stance of Russia in vetoing the resolution last week, along with the Iranian regime’s less public military and security support for the Assad regime, all come as little surprise to me. But, both Russia and Iran are playing a most heinous and ominous role in the destruction of the Syrian people, including countless unarmed civilians, women, men, and children alike. Michael Weiss published an article in the Telegraph that explicitly describes what’s happening in Syria, and the complicity of Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah in the slaughter of thousands:
“For those who haven’t had lunch today, I encourage you to see up-close what Russian weapons and Iranian and Hezbollah ‘military consultants’ have helped accomplish in Syria. This video is of a young boy in Homs. His entire lower jaw has been removed from his head and I’m told that this is more watchable version of the footage; an earlier reel went round where he hadn’t been anaesthetized yet.”
(NOTE: You can find the hyperlink to the video inside Michael Weiss’s article: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/michaelweiss/100135384/russia-iran-and-hezbollah-are-already-intervening-in-syria-why-arent-we/ — WARNING: It’s very graphic).
“Vladimir Putin’s copper-bottomed support for Bashar al-Assad at the UN Security Council can be taken in one of two ways. There will be those who claim that here was one organized crime lord pledging solidarity with his human ferret counterpart. The two men really do understand each other and are even beginning to replicate each other’s CVs. Assad is doing to Syria what Putin did to Chechnya a decade ago and under the same pretext of combating “terrorists”. Moscow had its dodgy apartment bombings in 1999, blamed with credible evidence on the FSB, to justify the razing of Grozny. Damascus has had its spate of “suicide bombings” lately, blamed by the regime on the following actors: al-Qaida, the United States, Israel, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Syrian opposition and loyalists of former Syrian Vice President Abdul Halim Khaddam. Footage showing the mukhabarat’s theatrics before and after these incidents matters not at all because the Assad regime, with a little help from Russia Today and other Kremlin mouthpieces, has also blamed “foreign media” for presenting a mere domestic misunderstanding as a full-blown humanitarian crisis. Taken another way, Putin’s support for Assad is a foreign policy “victory” that comes at just the right time for Russia, weeks ahead of a presidential election.
…If certain comment editors have difficulty finding Syrians on the ground who want NATO fighter jets overhead, I’ll be glad to introduce them to several.
Here is al-Sheikh: ‘As an activist and a coordinator for the Khaled Bin Waleed brigade, I state that we in Homs, Idlib and Damascus suburbs call for unilateral American and British intervention. We also want to improve our relations with the US administration and people after the revolution, but we need you to save us. We are getting slaughtered, save us’.”
You don’t need me to point out that the United Nations has miserably failed the Syrian people. The UN is broken and is far from democratic. If anything, this whole incident underscores the need for a UN overhaul; at a minimum, there should be provisions for those countries that wish to implement the R2P mandate in cases such as Syria to override Security Council vetoes. I am a diehard believer in state sovereignty, but I am a human rights activist first and foremost. Russia, Iran, and China have done a tremendous disservice to humanity. Now, Assad is having a field day in exterminating his own people: protesters and by-standers alike, civilians making a run for it to grab some bread (now in dire short supply), families huddling in their homes, and individuals picked off by snipers.
This reminds me of the bloody, ruthless killings in the former Yugoslavia. The Yugoslavia analogy is not off base… remember how long it finally took Western powers to intervene in Bosnia and stop the massacres?!! You’d think that we all have learned from lessons past.
The Syrian people have the right to live without fear. Most of all, they have the right to live. What the hell happened to the “Responsibility to Protect” civilians, that was so potently invoked in the case of Libya? I write this with a very heavy heart for Syria, and wish that ballet performances would have been the extent of Syrian-Russian relations. Sadly, it’s not.
NOTE: Everything I write in this blog constitutes my personal opinions and views.
Troubling reports are coming out of the Middle East and North Africa about detention and torture and killings of various groups and individuals. Nearly a year ago, the international community approved NATO’s no-fly zone in Libya on the basis of the “Responsibility to Protect” civilians from violence (known as the R2P mandate).
Now, we are hearing reports of detention, torture, and in some cases deaths of alleged pro-Qaddafi loyalists. According to a report posted on the Shabab Libya (Libyan Youth Movement) website, entitled “Canada Blasts Libya over Torture Reports” –
“Amnesty International said several detainees have died after being subjected to torture in recent weeks and months, and cited wide-spread, ill-treatment of Gadhafi loyalists.
Doctors Without Borders said it was pulling out of the city of Misrata because some detainees were brought for care only to make them fit for further interrogation…
‘There’s torture, extrajudicial executions, rape of both men and women,’ Navi Pillay, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, told The Associated Press.
‘Something has to be done immediately to assist the authorities for the state to take control of these detention centers.’
This is a terrible blemish on the Libyan interim government, although some would argue that the blemish actually appeared with the manner in which Colonel Qaddafi was abused and killed. As bad as he was, and despite all the blood on his hands, it was imperative for the Libyan rebels to resist the temptation to stoop to his level of gross barbarity.
No doubt there is deep anger and thirst for revenge in the region, including in Syria, after an exceptionally bloody week there. However, in the long run, it would be counterproductive for the very groups who have sought freedom and justice to resort to the same tactics of torture, abuse, and extrajudicial detentions and sentencing, especially in a post-regime change context. Ultimately, they will lose their moral legitimacy, as they will have blurred the lines between themselves and the tyrannical regimes they have been pitted against. Amnesty International and Doctors without Borders did the right thing. Everyone must be held under scrutiny, not just the regimes. No one is above the principles and laws of human rights.
NOTE: Everything I write in this blog constitutes my personal opinions and views.
On this Martin Luther King holiday, it is all the more fitting to shake our collective fingers at violent dictators like Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad, and remind them that, as MLK put it so eloquently, “unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word.”
Truth and justice do not hide behind guns, bombs, and torture devices. And, history has shown that the former carry moral legitimacy that far outweighs the morally bankrupt expediency of violence and brutality. The former also is more powerful in disarming the bully than the latter will ever be in oppressing the innocents.
Fear is never the best weapon. It’s a temporary emotion, and tyrants will only have temporary effectiveness. Noncooperation, noncompliance, and disobedience will always be stronger than tyranny, especially when they are infused with an infectious stubbornness that will not die. This is Mahatma Gandhi’s legacy, and also MLK’s.
Today Al Jazeera is reporting that Imad Ghalioun, a member of the Syrian parliament, has defected and joined the opposition. According to Al Jazeera –
“Imad Ghalioun, who represented the central city of Homs, told the Dubai-based al-Arabiya TV on Sunday night that the city is “disaster stricken” and has been subjected to sweeping human rights violations. Ghalioun said he was able to leave Syria before a travel ban was imposed on officials.
He said there are many legislators who support the uprising but have not said so publicly.”
It’s just a matter of time, for fear is temporary. Stay stubborn in the path of truth and justice. I leave you with a quote by MLK:
“Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.”
NOTE: Everything I write in this blog constitutes my personal opinions and views.
Hayat Alvi, Ph.D. 