Dr. Khaled Batarfi
I asked the Honda dealer for a car with window shades, and was told they don't have them. Why not? After years of strict no, the government finally allowed cars to be shaded in the back windows. The dealer smiled sweetly and teased: And what if they changed their minds, again?
He is right. I remember when they changed their minds before and car windows were smashed at the customs before they were allowed in. Luckily, the shaded Chrysler minivan I brought home after I finished my Ph.D. studies in the US was spared such a fate because the law had just changed. Since then, it has changed twice. Each time car and shopowners had to cope with a hefty price. Shades were pealed off cars, and inventories in shops and warehouses were confiscated or wasted with no compensation.
Abrupt rule changes are not new. In the late 1990s, shops in Jeddah had to close down in many areas because the newly appointed mayor revised the commercial zone system. Owners were given until the end of their contracts to move out. If that happened to be only days away, so be it! Many went bankrupt because they had invested their capitals in decorating and establishing their businesses. They couldn't afford to lose all these investments and just move on. "It isn't like a tent you fold and carry," I told the mayor. He wouldn't listen. Nobody cared then, nobody does now.
Today, we have three glaring examples of such arrogant and ignorant bureaucratic attitude. The Shoura Council has just approved a law that prohibits shops remaining open beyond 9 p. m. The committee that designed the law had already listened to representatives of shopowners who explained why a law that works for a village may not work for a city, or what suits school season may not be good for the holidays. The bureaucrats who might never have been in business decided that closing shops earlier will provide jobs for Saudis. How? I understand that more shifts mean more opportunities. But the way they see it is this: Saudis can only work eight hours a day, and if businesses are forced to stick with this time limit then more citizens would be encouraged to work for them.
They forgot that we, Saudis, especially in our typically hot summer, prefer to get out and about only at night. Closing shops earlier deprived both merchants and customers of the best time for conducting business.
While we encourage local tourism, mindless laws like this make it very hard for the industry to thrive and compete with the more alluring regional and international destinations. In Dubai and Bahrain, for instance, malls can stay open as late as past midnight. In hot and humid weather, where else, if not in air-conditioned malls, people can spend their leisure time?
Another example is the order to close live-bird shops. I understand the concern about bird flue, but the question is: Who should shoulder the burden? The shopowner, who may have invested his life's savings in the business or the government? If it is absolutely necessary to close these shops, then the government should compensate the owners or make it up for them by finding ways to recoup their losses and change course. The ever-modified law of furnished apartments is another case in point.
To just make laws, implement them, then wash your hands off the dire consequences for the affected parties is not fair.
The reason why laws had to be changed back and forth is that they were not well studied and conceived.
A good case is the limousine Saudization law. After issuing a decree that forced limousine companies to be fully Saudized within six months, the implementation was first delayed, then forgotten. For a start, there weren't enough Saudi drivers to fill the gap. The King Fund that gives interest-free loans to Saudis to buy taxis has not generated enough interest.
Besides, taxi companies were not consulted. In many instances, even after the concerned parties are consulted regarding a new law, their views are not always taken into account. When the universal rent contract was finally approved by the Shoura Council, the concerns of building owners were not heeded.
For businesses to prosper, we need stable laws and regulations. Investors must be quite sure that their investments won't be spoiled all on a sudden because some smart bureaucrats thought of changing the rules in the middle of the game. If this happens, then the government should shoulder the losses, not the players. This is only fair.
Thursday, June 15, 2006
Helping the Stock Market Victims
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
You hardly join a discussion these days without dwelling on the stock market Big Bang. People are confused, astonished, and angry.
When three to four million Saudis out of 13 are hurt you don't need a whistle-blower to tell you that something is worth keen attention. Unfortunately most discussions are focused on the market itself, less time is devoted to the social effects of the crash.
What do you do to help millions of affected people? Some sold all their worldly possessions to "gamble" in the bourse. Others left their secure jobs to find time and energy to invest in high-flying stocks. Many sold their homes, cars, shops and businesses below market prices to raise some reasonable capital. Women used their life savings, jewelry and dowry to get on board.
The crash was worse still for those who bought cars at installments and then sold them at much less than the original price. Also for those who got long-term bank loans and the workers who took advanced salaries from their companies. They all hoped to pay debts and make a fortune in a market that doubled in value for two consecutive years. They all turned into players in stock trade. Even the likes of my illiterate poor mother-in-law suddenly became proud shareowners, keen readers and armchair analysts of market trends.
A person I know was typical of many. He resigned a good position, collected retirement compensation, as well as the jewelry of his wife, daughters and sisters, plus some friends' savings. Then sold his farm and three loaned cars and put all proceeds in a bank portfolio. Against his three million riyals, the bank gave him three more. After the crash, he lost half the portfolio and the bank reclaimed the other half. He came out from this business with huge loans and debts and no revenue to pay them back or even to live on. He is now in deep depression after some heart and other health complications.
Like him, people of limited means and huge losses, are struggling to make ends meet. Imagine the short- and long-term effect of this shocking experience on them socially, psychologically, mentally and politically. How are they going to feel about those "fat cats", who stole the market? How are they going to evaluate the performance of the government agencies that were supposed to well manage the market and protect the weak and the unaware? And where will they go to pay huge debts and to cover daily expenses?
When crises hit, you need strong crisis management. We urgently need a high commission made of highly professional representatives of all concerned authorities and parties. Their mission should be to study and manage the social calamity and to provide solutions to affected people.
After the New York Stock Exchange crash of 1929, millions went broke and hungry, until President F. D. Roosevelt sponsored the congressional bill that created the Social Security Act of 1935. The new system provided a safety network for the needy and unemployed. It also helped spur the economic recovery in the 1940s and 1950s.
What we need is urgent steps to help people cope with their losses and challenges. For example, we should reach an understanding with loaners such as banks, government loan funds and car companies, to reschedule loans to market victims. We ought to make it easier for those who resigned jobs to reclaim them. And we must give more support to charities to help them provide food, shelter, medical and social services to the deprived.
We also need more good economic news - more business and job opportunities, greater investments and projects, higher public spending, lower rates on services (electricity, natural gas etc.) and salary bonuses. For the unemployed, we should provide social security benefits.
When the stock market crisis hit Asia in the mid-1990s, most governments were financially ill prepared to deal with the aftermath. Fortunately, our finances are in good shape with oil prices hovering around $70 a barrel and we could afford to deal with this situation.
Fixing the stock market is top national priority; so is helping the victims and providing for the most affected.
You hardly join a discussion these days without dwelling on the stock market Big Bang. People are confused, astonished, and angry.
When three to four million Saudis out of 13 are hurt you don't need a whistle-blower to tell you that something is worth keen attention. Unfortunately most discussions are focused on the market itself, less time is devoted to the social effects of the crash.
What do you do to help millions of affected people? Some sold all their worldly possessions to "gamble" in the bourse. Others left their secure jobs to find time and energy to invest in high-flying stocks. Many sold their homes, cars, shops and businesses below market prices to raise some reasonable capital. Women used their life savings, jewelry and dowry to get on board.
The crash was worse still for those who bought cars at installments and then sold them at much less than the original price. Also for those who got long-term bank loans and the workers who took advanced salaries from their companies. They all hoped to pay debts and make a fortune in a market that doubled in value for two consecutive years. They all turned into players in stock trade. Even the likes of my illiterate poor mother-in-law suddenly became proud shareowners, keen readers and armchair analysts of market trends.
A person I know was typical of many. He resigned a good position, collected retirement compensation, as well as the jewelry of his wife, daughters and sisters, plus some friends' savings. Then sold his farm and three loaned cars and put all proceeds in a bank portfolio. Against his three million riyals, the bank gave him three more. After the crash, he lost half the portfolio and the bank reclaimed the other half. He came out from this business with huge loans and debts and no revenue to pay them back or even to live on. He is now in deep depression after some heart and other health complications.
Like him, people of limited means and huge losses, are struggling to make ends meet. Imagine the short- and long-term effect of this shocking experience on them socially, psychologically, mentally and politically. How are they going to feel about those "fat cats", who stole the market? How are they going to evaluate the performance of the government agencies that were supposed to well manage the market and protect the weak and the unaware? And where will they go to pay huge debts and to cover daily expenses?
When crises hit, you need strong crisis management. We urgently need a high commission made of highly professional representatives of all concerned authorities and parties. Their mission should be to study and manage the social calamity and to provide solutions to affected people.
After the New York Stock Exchange crash of 1929, millions went broke and hungry, until President F. D. Roosevelt sponsored the congressional bill that created the Social Security Act of 1935. The new system provided a safety network for the needy and unemployed. It also helped spur the economic recovery in the 1940s and 1950s.
What we need is urgent steps to help people cope with their losses and challenges. For example, we should reach an understanding with loaners such as banks, government loan funds and car companies, to reschedule loans to market victims. We ought to make it easier for those who resigned jobs to reclaim them. And we must give more support to charities to help them provide food, shelter, medical and social services to the deprived.
We also need more good economic news - more business and job opportunities, greater investments and projects, higher public spending, lower rates on services (electricity, natural gas etc.) and salary bonuses. For the unemployed, we should provide social security benefits.
When the stock market crisis hit Asia in the mid-1990s, most governments were financially ill prepared to deal with the aftermath. Fortunately, our finances are in good shape with oil prices hovering around $70 a barrel and we could afford to deal with this situation.
Fixing the stock market is top national priority; so is helping the victims and providing for the most affected.
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
Advocating the Rights of Women and Minorities
Dr. Khaled Batarfi,
Last Saturday, our weekly diwania was very tense. A prominent Saudi columnist was disappointed that his paper wouldn't publish one of his articles. In the article, he had criticized a prominent family for not announcing the name of their daughter in the wedding invitation card. Most people only print the name of the groom. His conclusion was: If the leading families of the country, who happened to be liberal, are afraid of breaking this custom, then who will dare to free us from Dark-Ages ways?
The rest of us were divided. Nobody disagreed that traditions, mostly accumulated in the last 30 years, insult women by hiding their names. We disagreed on explaining the tradition.
The writer who came from the tribal South assured us that it didn't use to be like that 30 years ago. The men in his village knew all women by the face and name. Today, thanks to the neo-Islamists, they all cover their faces and hide their names.
Instead of referring to your wife, sister or daughter by their given names, you say my folks or dependents, he noted. "Last week, I was called to my son's school because he was in a fight. Why? His classmate kept telling him his sister's name. Yes, she is my sister; my son's response was every time. Finally, my son told his friend: I know your sister's name, too. The boy went bananas and into big fight. What my son didn't know in the beginning of this episode was that the boy meant it as an insult. This was common. It shouldn't, and we, opinion and society leaders, should fight it. The least we could do is to announce our daughters' names in their wedding invitation cards."
I supported his position and reminded the others that names of the Prophet's mother, wives, daughters and female members of his extended family were not kept secret. We also know the names of the greatest women in our Islamic history. King Abdul Aziz, the founder of modern Saudi Arabia was proud of his sister Nora, to the extent that he gave himself the nick name "Akho Nora" (the brother of Nora). Names of King Abdullah's wife and daughters are announced when they participate in or sponsor public events and charity works.
No one disagreed with our position, but some wondered whether it is the responsibility of prominent families and opinion leaders to advocate such a position. The argument goes like this: "While it is absolutely right to announce the female names in any event or invitation cards, we should also respect the right of those who choose not to. Leading families or not, every group has its traditions, and every person has his/her convictions. We should respect, if not celebrate, cultural diversity."
Then, we debated another point: Should the government advocate changing wrong customs and how? The writer insisted we should use schools, media and all available platforms to promote positive changes in our society.
Women's rights, respect for other religions, sects and thoughts, for example, are not subject to disagreement.
Therefore, the government, media and intellectuals should design public education and awareness programs to promote these rights and principles, starting with kindergarten and children's books.
The movement that took our society to where it is now should be overturned.
Others disagreed. They argued that societies develop in their own way, at their own pace without intervention from governments or other organized forces. No one group or authority has the right to direct social attitudes, traditions and convictions.
My stand was: Since "organized forces" were allowed for ages to take society to where it is now, we should allow others from different schools of thought with noble principles (like rights for women and minorities) to do the same.
The curriculum has to be changed in accord with these values. To reach acceptable level of national consensus on these issues, we could simply follow the recommendations of our national dialogue forums.
This way, we could avoid siding with one group or another. This way, we legitimize the campaign for positive change. And this way, we help society move forward - the least we could do for the majority, our women plus minorities.
History is a train that can only go forward. And it won't await us forever.
Last Saturday, our weekly diwania was very tense. A prominent Saudi columnist was disappointed that his paper wouldn't publish one of his articles. In the article, he had criticized a prominent family for not announcing the name of their daughter in the wedding invitation card. Most people only print the name of the groom. His conclusion was: If the leading families of the country, who happened to be liberal, are afraid of breaking this custom, then who will dare to free us from Dark-Ages ways?
The rest of us were divided. Nobody disagreed that traditions, mostly accumulated in the last 30 years, insult women by hiding their names. We disagreed on explaining the tradition.
The writer who came from the tribal South assured us that it didn't use to be like that 30 years ago. The men in his village knew all women by the face and name. Today, thanks to the neo-Islamists, they all cover their faces and hide their names.
Instead of referring to your wife, sister or daughter by their given names, you say my folks or dependents, he noted. "Last week, I was called to my son's school because he was in a fight. Why? His classmate kept telling him his sister's name. Yes, she is my sister; my son's response was every time. Finally, my son told his friend: I know your sister's name, too. The boy went bananas and into big fight. What my son didn't know in the beginning of this episode was that the boy meant it as an insult. This was common. It shouldn't, and we, opinion and society leaders, should fight it. The least we could do is to announce our daughters' names in their wedding invitation cards."
I supported his position and reminded the others that names of the Prophet's mother, wives, daughters and female members of his extended family were not kept secret. We also know the names of the greatest women in our Islamic history. King Abdul Aziz, the founder of modern Saudi Arabia was proud of his sister Nora, to the extent that he gave himself the nick name "Akho Nora" (the brother of Nora). Names of King Abdullah's wife and daughters are announced when they participate in or sponsor public events and charity works.
No one disagreed with our position, but some wondered whether it is the responsibility of prominent families and opinion leaders to advocate such a position. The argument goes like this: "While it is absolutely right to announce the female names in any event or invitation cards, we should also respect the right of those who choose not to. Leading families or not, every group has its traditions, and every person has his/her convictions. We should respect, if not celebrate, cultural diversity."
Then, we debated another point: Should the government advocate changing wrong customs and how? The writer insisted we should use schools, media and all available platforms to promote positive changes in our society.
Women's rights, respect for other religions, sects and thoughts, for example, are not subject to disagreement.
Therefore, the government, media and intellectuals should design public education and awareness programs to promote these rights and principles, starting with kindergarten and children's books.
The movement that took our society to where it is now should be overturned.
Others disagreed. They argued that societies develop in their own way, at their own pace without intervention from governments or other organized forces. No one group or authority has the right to direct social attitudes, traditions and convictions.
My stand was: Since "organized forces" were allowed for ages to take society to where it is now, we should allow others from different schools of thought with noble principles (like rights for women and minorities) to do the same.
The curriculum has to be changed in accord with these values. To reach acceptable level of national consensus on these issues, we could simply follow the recommendations of our national dialogue forums.
This way, we could avoid siding with one group or another. This way, we legitimize the campaign for positive change. And this way, we help society move forward - the least we could do for the majority, our women plus minorities.
History is a train that can only go forward. And it won't await us forever.
Monday, May 01, 2006
The American Culture Shock Works for Sure
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
“Would Osama Bin Laden have ended up so anti-American if he had the chance you had to live and study in the US?” the American journalist wondered.
I gave him a long answer (sorry it wasn’t an easy question): “Many Muslims went to America conservative and came back liberal. Others only became conservative, even radicals, after their American experience. A few remained uninfluenced either way.
Said Qutub, the godfather of Islamic radicalism, was a romantic poet before he lived for a short while in Colorado, one of the most beautiful places on earth. Still, he wrote later about his discovery then and there of the Western decadence and how he decided to change course to fight the US influence on the Muslim world. His books persuaded many Muslim generations and led them on the way of confrontation with Western values and with Muslim regimes that do not strictly adhere to the Shariah.
On the other hand, most people I know, young and old, returned from America positively impressed. A prominent anti-US leftist told me after his first visit: I discovered that America is not just pro-Israel Congress and White House. It is also the hospitable, friendly, open and generous people.
During the cross-Atlantic flight from London to New York, my American neighbor told me all about his life and family, showed me their pictures, and discussed everything from the environment to US foreign policies. We agreed and disagreed, but he never showed any anger, arrogance, stubbornness or hostility. Before we parted ways, he gave me his card, invited me home, and ... presented me with a medal of honor he received in the US Army.
Are all Americans like that? I didn’t live enough in the States to judge, but all the people I met from the steward on the airplane, to the passport officer, to the man in the street, were so nice to me. How could I hate a country with such lovely attitude? How could I ever hate America the country, the people and civilization? No, from now on, I’ll just hate their foreign policies.
Going to America right away from a conservative society is usually a huge culture shock. Many cannot cope, but most do process the change and absorb the different lifestyle, in time. America, as an immigrant society, more than most Western nations, has the capacity of accommodating and welcoming strangers. Depending on the place you happen to visit or live in, you may get easier or harder transit experience. Young and liberal get on faster than the older and conservative, but somehow, almost all manage to manage.
Back to the original question, I don’t think Osama, who did shortly visit America in the 1970s for medical treatment for his son, would have changed fundamentally. His stand is more political than social. His criticism is directed at US foreign policies, not at American social attitudes. But knowing how friendly the average American is, I’d bet that would have made a good impression on Osama.
I was lucky to have known American expatriates since childhood. The kids in the nearby compound were my playmates. This allowed me to see the different other not as a stranger or an enemy but as a friend. After years of study in the US, the positive image was enforced. My professors, classmates and neighbors of all faiths, races and colors showed me that no matter what a person’s background maybe it is how he treats you and what ethics and values he upholds that matters.
I would imagine that for the anti-Americans of the world to live in such a liberal, friendly, and civilized environment as I did in Eugene, Oregon would have made them more tolerant and friendly and less suspicious and hostile. It would moderate their anger toward the public who elected a government they despise. It would make them understand that electing a president doesn’t necessarily mean supporting all his foreign policies.
That is one reason I encourage our students, professionals and opinion and community leaders to have such experience and exposure.
It defeats our best intentions and purposes to encourage studies in the States and then find it so difficult and humiliating to get a visa. It would very much help if we expand on Saudi-American visitor exchange programs, workshops, conferences and scholarships. We need more of face-to-face, people-to- people meetings.
Only by building a direct bridge between our peoples and cultures will we get to know each other, and care for each other. Love doesn’t grow in abstention.
“Would Osama Bin Laden have ended up so anti-American if he had the chance you had to live and study in the US?” the American journalist wondered.
I gave him a long answer (sorry it wasn’t an easy question): “Many Muslims went to America conservative and came back liberal. Others only became conservative, even radicals, after their American experience. A few remained uninfluenced either way.
Said Qutub, the godfather of Islamic radicalism, was a romantic poet before he lived for a short while in Colorado, one of the most beautiful places on earth. Still, he wrote later about his discovery then and there of the Western decadence and how he decided to change course to fight the US influence on the Muslim world. His books persuaded many Muslim generations and led them on the way of confrontation with Western values and with Muslim regimes that do not strictly adhere to the Shariah.
On the other hand, most people I know, young and old, returned from America positively impressed. A prominent anti-US leftist told me after his first visit: I discovered that America is not just pro-Israel Congress and White House. It is also the hospitable, friendly, open and generous people.
During the cross-Atlantic flight from London to New York, my American neighbor told me all about his life and family, showed me their pictures, and discussed everything from the environment to US foreign policies. We agreed and disagreed, but he never showed any anger, arrogance, stubbornness or hostility. Before we parted ways, he gave me his card, invited me home, and ... presented me with a medal of honor he received in the US Army.
Are all Americans like that? I didn’t live enough in the States to judge, but all the people I met from the steward on the airplane, to the passport officer, to the man in the street, were so nice to me. How could I hate a country with such lovely attitude? How could I ever hate America the country, the people and civilization? No, from now on, I’ll just hate their foreign policies.
Going to America right away from a conservative society is usually a huge culture shock. Many cannot cope, but most do process the change and absorb the different lifestyle, in time. America, as an immigrant society, more than most Western nations, has the capacity of accommodating and welcoming strangers. Depending on the place you happen to visit or live in, you may get easier or harder transit experience. Young and liberal get on faster than the older and conservative, but somehow, almost all manage to manage.
Back to the original question, I don’t think Osama, who did shortly visit America in the 1970s for medical treatment for his son, would have changed fundamentally. His stand is more political than social. His criticism is directed at US foreign policies, not at American social attitudes. But knowing how friendly the average American is, I’d bet that would have made a good impression on Osama.
I was lucky to have known American expatriates since childhood. The kids in the nearby compound were my playmates. This allowed me to see the different other not as a stranger or an enemy but as a friend. After years of study in the US, the positive image was enforced. My professors, classmates and neighbors of all faiths, races and colors showed me that no matter what a person’s background maybe it is how he treats you and what ethics and values he upholds that matters.
I would imagine that for the anti-Americans of the world to live in such a liberal, friendly, and civilized environment as I did in Eugene, Oregon would have made them more tolerant and friendly and less suspicious and hostile. It would moderate their anger toward the public who elected a government they despise. It would make them understand that electing a president doesn’t necessarily mean supporting all his foreign policies.
That is one reason I encourage our students, professionals and opinion and community leaders to have such experience and exposure.
It defeats our best intentions and purposes to encourage studies in the States and then find it so difficult and humiliating to get a visa. It would very much help if we expand on Saudi-American visitor exchange programs, workshops, conferences and scholarships. We need more of face-to-face, people-to- people meetings.
Only by building a direct bridge between our peoples and cultures will we get to know each other, and care for each other. Love doesn’t grow in abstention.
What is Wrong with the Stock Market?
What is Wrong with the Stock Market?
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
John D. Rockefeller was once asked why he decided to sell all his stocks just months before the 1929 Wall Street Crash. He explained: One morning, I was on the way to my office and stopped to have my shoes polished. The guy asked my advice about the shares he bought. If people with this kind of talent were now playing the market, I knew there was something wrong.
The limousine driver who took me home from Jeddah airport announced happily that this was his last trip. He was retiring. The young, high school graduate, explained to me that he was now a good broker. For months now, he sits on the computer at home, buying and selling in the stock market. Starting with a few thousands, he is now making more than he gets from his limousine, without the headache. Like Rockefeller, I knew then there was something wrong. But unlike Rockefeller, I haven’t sold my stocks. I am stuck with it now. In fact, we should have seen it coming long time ago. There are lots of things that have been wrong, persistently.
Let’s start with the imbalance of liquidity and availability. While the first is increasing, reaching historical heights of over half a trillion riyals in private accounts alone, few shares and investment avenues are available. For some reason, giant companies, like petrochemical SABIC, petroleum ARAMCO, telecom STC, Saudi Arabian Airlines, Saudi Arabia’s biggest banks Al-Ahli and Samba, among others, are mostly or completely in government hands. Take SABIC for example. When it was partially privatized (30 percent) the promise was more percentage to follow. This was some 20 years ago, and until now there is not even a hint of what to expect. Therefore, lots of money is chasing few shares and investment opportunities. The bubble market was a sure result. Bursting was a question of when not if.
Another “wrong” is the absence of transparency. The overseers of the stock market are not talking. The overseers of the whole economy are not talking either. The movers and shakers, nicknamed hamoors after the big fish, are hardly known. The media has no clue. And only the hamoor-connected analysts are talking to the masses. Of course, their advice is self-serving, leading buyers toward one company’s stock or another.
Three million Saudis, out of 13 million, went wild in the wild market. Few have any clue. They buy and sell on rumors and instinct, with little or no idea about the solidity of the company they buy in. Therefore, bankrupt and small-time businesses’ shares are sold at higher rates than that of market leaders. Bisha’s shares, the small agricultural company with a few thousands date trees, reached over SR2,400, much higher than SABIC’s SR1,800. Why? Because a few “hamoors,” who own most of the shares, artificially inflated them. When the time was right, they sold all, and let the price fall to the range of a few hundred.
What was the penalty, if any? Only a few people were punished. Their identities were not revealed. And the punishment didn’t include imprisonment. Their response? Driving the market from around the point of 21,000 to bellow 13,000! The government response? In the first interview ever with Jammaz Al-Suhaimi, chairman of the Capital Market Authority, we were told that 50 percent of the liquidity was invested in the weak companies and that this has to be corrected. What is new in the most important matter of transparency and strong rules against cheaters? Nothing. Business will continue to run as usual.
The huge drop goes against market fundamentals. Corporations are making tons of profits. Banks are doubling their earnings. Business thrives and projects are plenty. In short, we have no shortage of good news.
I would understand that weak companies are losing much of their inflated values — this is called correction. But the big question is: Why every company, good and bad, beautiful and ugly, rich and poor is losing, too? And if the hamoors are doing it, and we already know them by name and address, why can’t we “correct” them, as well? The banks are now turning down loan requests to invest in the stock market. This takes out much of the liquidity. Can’t we do something about that?
I don’t know how much “correction” we need, and what we can do without interfering too much in a free market phenomenon, but what worries me is that no one else seems to know. And if those who are supposed to know are not telling or doing something about it, then we all should worry. At stake here is not only the state of a trillion-riyal market, but the economy train this engine is driving. Crash seems to be the one conclusion I can see.
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
John D. Rockefeller was once asked why he decided to sell all his stocks just months before the 1929 Wall Street Crash. He explained: One morning, I was on the way to my office and stopped to have my shoes polished. The guy asked my advice about the shares he bought. If people with this kind of talent were now playing the market, I knew there was something wrong.
The limousine driver who took me home from Jeddah airport announced happily that this was his last trip. He was retiring. The young, high school graduate, explained to me that he was now a good broker. For months now, he sits on the computer at home, buying and selling in the stock market. Starting with a few thousands, he is now making more than he gets from his limousine, without the headache. Like Rockefeller, I knew then there was something wrong. But unlike Rockefeller, I haven’t sold my stocks. I am stuck with it now. In fact, we should have seen it coming long time ago. There are lots of things that have been wrong, persistently.
Let’s start with the imbalance of liquidity and availability. While the first is increasing, reaching historical heights of over half a trillion riyals in private accounts alone, few shares and investment avenues are available. For some reason, giant companies, like petrochemical SABIC, petroleum ARAMCO, telecom STC, Saudi Arabian Airlines, Saudi Arabia’s biggest banks Al-Ahli and Samba, among others, are mostly or completely in government hands. Take SABIC for example. When it was partially privatized (30 percent) the promise was more percentage to follow. This was some 20 years ago, and until now there is not even a hint of what to expect. Therefore, lots of money is chasing few shares and investment opportunities. The bubble market was a sure result. Bursting was a question of when not if.
Another “wrong” is the absence of transparency. The overseers of the stock market are not talking. The overseers of the whole economy are not talking either. The movers and shakers, nicknamed hamoors after the big fish, are hardly known. The media has no clue. And only the hamoor-connected analysts are talking to the masses. Of course, their advice is self-serving, leading buyers toward one company’s stock or another.
Three million Saudis, out of 13 million, went wild in the wild market. Few have any clue. They buy and sell on rumors and instinct, with little or no idea about the solidity of the company they buy in. Therefore, bankrupt and small-time businesses’ shares are sold at higher rates than that of market leaders. Bisha’s shares, the small agricultural company with a few thousands date trees, reached over SR2,400, much higher than SABIC’s SR1,800. Why? Because a few “hamoors,” who own most of the shares, artificially inflated them. When the time was right, they sold all, and let the price fall to the range of a few hundred.
What was the penalty, if any? Only a few people were punished. Their identities were not revealed. And the punishment didn’t include imprisonment. Their response? Driving the market from around the point of 21,000 to bellow 13,000! The government response? In the first interview ever with Jammaz Al-Suhaimi, chairman of the Capital Market Authority, we were told that 50 percent of the liquidity was invested in the weak companies and that this has to be corrected. What is new in the most important matter of transparency and strong rules against cheaters? Nothing. Business will continue to run as usual.
The huge drop goes against market fundamentals. Corporations are making tons of profits. Banks are doubling their earnings. Business thrives and projects are plenty. In short, we have no shortage of good news.
I would understand that weak companies are losing much of their inflated values — this is called correction. But the big question is: Why every company, good and bad, beautiful and ugly, rich and poor is losing, too? And if the hamoors are doing it, and we already know them by name and address, why can’t we “correct” them, as well? The banks are now turning down loan requests to invest in the stock market. This takes out much of the liquidity. Can’t we do something about that?
I don’t know how much “correction” we need, and what we can do without interfering too much in a free market phenomenon, but what worries me is that no one else seems to know. And if those who are supposed to know are not telling or doing something about it, then we all should worry. At stake here is not only the state of a trillion-riyal market, but the economy train this engine is driving. Crash seems to be the one conclusion I can see.
Sunday, April 16, 2006
It Is Time for New Saudi-US Bridges
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
Communication is both art and science. You may be born with the gift, but you need to work on it. Certain tools that come with education and experience are needed. You should know what you are talking about and whom you are talking to, master the language preferred by your audience, and prepare well with information and training.
We all need good communicators. You need to sell your convictions, products, and messages to all kinds of people at all levels for so many purposes. At home, shop and government, whether you are selling a new budgetary system, a new toothbrush or a political candidate, good communication skills are essential.
Saudis and Americans found themselves in dire need of outstanding communicators after Sept. 11, 2001. Unfortunately, there was shortage of such talent on both sides. Somehow, we couldn’t communicate well for many years. Things are improving, but still ... a lot needs to be done before we declare victory.
Needless to say, we were totally taken by surprise. In the beginning, we, Saudis, couldn’t believe that some of our own committed such horrible and sophisticated crime. We were stuck in the denial mode for too long.
Some still are. This cost us very precious time. By the moment we moved, it was almost too late to repair the damage, let alone improve the image of our nation, culture and people. Our enemies, on both sides, used the stall to further the damage and their agenda. Religious radicals, Christian, Jewish and Muslim, crossed interests and locked moves to break all bridges between Islam and the West, Saudi and American.
Where have all of us, Saudi and Americans, gone wrong? First, we should have seen it coming — not necessarily at the same magnitude. The omens were plenty. Radicalism on all sides was increasing. Israel was pushing the envelope. Peace projects — UN-sanctioned, US-guaranteed deals — were ignored. Arab and Muslim anger was boiling.
From our ivory towers, we were watching. Some of us tried to understand. Many were happy with their packaged explanations. Little was done to contain the phenomena. Our priorities were different. Economic woes, domestic politics and other distractions took our eyes away from the ball. When it finally hit us, we were poorly prepared to act — except in anger. Our actions were actually reactions. Our audience was mostly domestic.
Second, we were in the denial mode for too long. This is natural human behavior, but hardly wise. When faced with an ugly truth, we tend to disbelieve, refuse admittance, and return fire with fire: Criticism with criticism, accusations with accusations. Lots of valuable time and effort are wasted in the process. In the meanwhile, the bad guys are working round the clock to boost their gains and increase our losses.
Third, in time of perceived danger, people tend to ignore their differences and stick together. Right or wrong, they retreat to the siege mentality. In such a mode, no mistake is admitted, and not even an inch is given away. That might be understandable or excusable, if, at least, you search your soul then admit and fix your problems. Staying the course, no matter how wrong, is suicidal.
Still, it is not too late. Communication, in my opinion, is the key. We started in the last couple of years to build and rebuild some bridges. To increase the momentum and speed up the pace, we should improve our tools.
We come from different cultures and speak different languages, but that is a challenge, not an obstacle.
Many Saudis studied in America, and many Americans worked in Saudi Arabia. They lived in their host countries for years, made friends, explored the culture, and some even intermarried.
Most feel depressed about the post-9/11 state of our relations. They are fired and ready to do something about it. All we need is some training, organization and support.
Let’s imagine we start some sort of Saudi-US friends clubs here and there, link them tighter, and provide them with channels and avenues to communicate with media and public.
Sponsored visits, conferences, visitor and student exchange programs and so many other activities and events can spring out and spread around. In time, we will win, because, when given a choice, people prefer peace and cooperation to hate and confrontation. This is especially true when the storms of anger and confusion pass, as they did. It is now time for reflection, reassessment, repair and reconnection. It is now time for educated, enlightened, well-thought and organized action. It is now time for the good guys to prevail.
Communication is both art and science. You may be born with the gift, but you need to work on it. Certain tools that come with education and experience are needed. You should know what you are talking about and whom you are talking to, master the language preferred by your audience, and prepare well with information and training.
We all need good communicators. You need to sell your convictions, products, and messages to all kinds of people at all levels for so many purposes. At home, shop and government, whether you are selling a new budgetary system, a new toothbrush or a political candidate, good communication skills are essential.
Saudis and Americans found themselves in dire need of outstanding communicators after Sept. 11, 2001. Unfortunately, there was shortage of such talent on both sides. Somehow, we couldn’t communicate well for many years. Things are improving, but still ... a lot needs to be done before we declare victory.
Needless to say, we were totally taken by surprise. In the beginning, we, Saudis, couldn’t believe that some of our own committed such horrible and sophisticated crime. We were stuck in the denial mode for too long.
Some still are. This cost us very precious time. By the moment we moved, it was almost too late to repair the damage, let alone improve the image of our nation, culture and people. Our enemies, on both sides, used the stall to further the damage and their agenda. Religious radicals, Christian, Jewish and Muslim, crossed interests and locked moves to break all bridges between Islam and the West, Saudi and American.
Where have all of us, Saudi and Americans, gone wrong? First, we should have seen it coming — not necessarily at the same magnitude. The omens were plenty. Radicalism on all sides was increasing. Israel was pushing the envelope. Peace projects — UN-sanctioned, US-guaranteed deals — were ignored. Arab and Muslim anger was boiling.
From our ivory towers, we were watching. Some of us tried to understand. Many were happy with their packaged explanations. Little was done to contain the phenomena. Our priorities were different. Economic woes, domestic politics and other distractions took our eyes away from the ball. When it finally hit us, we were poorly prepared to act — except in anger. Our actions were actually reactions. Our audience was mostly domestic.
Second, we were in the denial mode for too long. This is natural human behavior, but hardly wise. When faced with an ugly truth, we tend to disbelieve, refuse admittance, and return fire with fire: Criticism with criticism, accusations with accusations. Lots of valuable time and effort are wasted in the process. In the meanwhile, the bad guys are working round the clock to boost their gains and increase our losses.
Third, in time of perceived danger, people tend to ignore their differences and stick together. Right or wrong, they retreat to the siege mentality. In such a mode, no mistake is admitted, and not even an inch is given away. That might be understandable or excusable, if, at least, you search your soul then admit and fix your problems. Staying the course, no matter how wrong, is suicidal.
Still, it is not too late. Communication, in my opinion, is the key. We started in the last couple of years to build and rebuild some bridges. To increase the momentum and speed up the pace, we should improve our tools.
We come from different cultures and speak different languages, but that is a challenge, not an obstacle.
Many Saudis studied in America, and many Americans worked in Saudi Arabia. They lived in their host countries for years, made friends, explored the culture, and some even intermarried.
Most feel depressed about the post-9/11 state of our relations. They are fired and ready to do something about it. All we need is some training, organization and support.
Let’s imagine we start some sort of Saudi-US friends clubs here and there, link them tighter, and provide them with channels and avenues to communicate with media and public.
Sponsored visits, conferences, visitor and student exchange programs and so many other activities and events can spring out and spread around. In time, we will win, because, when given a choice, people prefer peace and cooperation to hate and confrontation. This is especially true when the storms of anger and confusion pass, as they did. It is now time for reflection, reassessment, repair and reconnection. It is now time for educated, enlightened, well-thought and organized action. It is now time for the good guys to prevail.
A Tale of Three Cities
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
Dr. Basim is a prominent Saudi lawyer. At one time he worked for the World Bank in New York. We all envied him. What a position he held in the capital of capitals of world capitalism!
But then he suddenly returned and sat a law firm in Jeddah. Now don't get me wrong; I expect our brightest to come back home after they finish their studies abroad. We need them. But for a Saudi to represent us in such a great institution is an honor to be upheld.
Thinking he was just homesick, I was critical. He should have stayed longer to get more experience and prominence, I told him.
It wasn't homesickness that brought me back, he calmly explained. "One day I was hurrying down a Manhattan street on my way home. Then I realized that there was no reason to hurry. I had no family waiting for me, no date or appointment and wasn't hungry. I slowed down and was pushed over by the guy behind. He was cursing at the sudden slowness. When I asked him why the hurry, he was disgusted. Only oldies, handicapped and tourists would walk the way I did, he snapped.
I put my back to the wall and stopped to watch the human traffic. It was 5.30 p.m, and most people seemed, just like me, on their way home. They all hurried. They all ran. Why? I asked myself. Because that is the rhythm of life in New York. We chase our tails to survive.
We run in vicious circles, until it becomes the norm. You compete with yourself if you don't have a competition.
Do I need this? Can I survive with a slower rhythm of life? Not in such a capitalist city, I decided. Then and there I realized I must go home."
In three weeks I had been to three different cities. London, a favorite of mine, showed me how we can be modern, capitalist and preserve a unique culture, all at the same time.
Dubai, tries hard to follow on the same footsteps. Problem is, like most Gulf states or cities, they jumped from tents to towers without the necessary progressing trip in between.
Then I went to Tunis. Even though a French colony for centuries, they progressed much earlier. Still, they haven't gone down as far in the capitalism and consumerism road as have London and Dubai.
The rhythm there was refreshingly relaxed. I spent most of my money in seawater and mineral springs spas-much less in the elegant but relatively few, small and expensive shops and malls.
The Tunisian heritage is very much preserved. The social life is largely intact, even in cities. People are going about their lives with much easier breath. They have plenty of time to chat with you on the street, to take you home for dinner or to sit with you at a cafe for sweets and a cup of tea.
Here, in Jeddah, where I live, things are changing ... fast. Malls are erupting everywhere. Materialism and consumerism, symptoms of free market and capitalism, are gaining ground even with conservatives. More and more, we measure people and achievements by numbers rather than merit. Less and less we find time to reflect, enjoy our gifts of family and friends and take breaks.
It doesn't have to be one way or another. We don't have to live in tents or work half a day. We don't have to live in jungles of cements and asphalt, either. What we need is a balance. Once we decided on that, we could formulate a vision-as a nation and as individuals. Our cities, our homes, our lives could be built upon that.
One thing we can't afford: To rush down the road without an objective, without a plan, without even a map.
Dr. Basim is a prominent Saudi lawyer. At one time he worked for the World Bank in New York. We all envied him. What a position he held in the capital of capitals of world capitalism!
But then he suddenly returned and sat a law firm in Jeddah. Now don't get me wrong; I expect our brightest to come back home after they finish their studies abroad. We need them. But for a Saudi to represent us in such a great institution is an honor to be upheld.
Thinking he was just homesick, I was critical. He should have stayed longer to get more experience and prominence, I told him.
It wasn't homesickness that brought me back, he calmly explained. "One day I was hurrying down a Manhattan street on my way home. Then I realized that there was no reason to hurry. I had no family waiting for me, no date or appointment and wasn't hungry. I slowed down and was pushed over by the guy behind. He was cursing at the sudden slowness. When I asked him why the hurry, he was disgusted. Only oldies, handicapped and tourists would walk the way I did, he snapped.
I put my back to the wall and stopped to watch the human traffic. It was 5.30 p.m, and most people seemed, just like me, on their way home. They all hurried. They all ran. Why? I asked myself. Because that is the rhythm of life in New York. We chase our tails to survive.
We run in vicious circles, until it becomes the norm. You compete with yourself if you don't have a competition.
Do I need this? Can I survive with a slower rhythm of life? Not in such a capitalist city, I decided. Then and there I realized I must go home."
In three weeks I had been to three different cities. London, a favorite of mine, showed me how we can be modern, capitalist and preserve a unique culture, all at the same time.
Dubai, tries hard to follow on the same footsteps. Problem is, like most Gulf states or cities, they jumped from tents to towers without the necessary progressing trip in between.
Then I went to Tunis. Even though a French colony for centuries, they progressed much earlier. Still, they haven't gone down as far in the capitalism and consumerism road as have London and Dubai.
The rhythm there was refreshingly relaxed. I spent most of my money in seawater and mineral springs spas-much less in the elegant but relatively few, small and expensive shops and malls.
The Tunisian heritage is very much preserved. The social life is largely intact, even in cities. People are going about their lives with much easier breath. They have plenty of time to chat with you on the street, to take you home for dinner or to sit with you at a cafe for sweets and a cup of tea.
Here, in Jeddah, where I live, things are changing ... fast. Malls are erupting everywhere. Materialism and consumerism, symptoms of free market and capitalism, are gaining ground even with conservatives. More and more, we measure people and achievements by numbers rather than merit. Less and less we find time to reflect, enjoy our gifts of family and friends and take breaks.
It doesn't have to be one way or another. We don't have to live in tents or work half a day. We don't have to live in jungles of cements and asphalt, either. What we need is a balance. Once we decided on that, we could formulate a vision-as a nation and as individuals. Our cities, our homes, our lives could be built upon that.
One thing we can't afford: To rush down the road without an objective, without a plan, without even a map.
The French Approach to Muslim Discontent
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
France has been a strong supporter of Arab causes after King Faisal’s state visit and crucial meeting with President Charles de Gaulle days before the 1967 Arab-Israeli War.
France’s stand against the war on Iraq and the larger US-led campaign to fight terror with terror won it lots of credit in the Arab and Muslim world. However, the pretty image was stained lately by a couple of major events: The law prohibiting hijab in public schools, and the recent riots in its poor Muslim neighborhoods. Both exposed the deep-rooted racism toward the French of Arab origin and Muslim background. As public polls showed, most French applauded the hijab ban and don’t think highly of their Muslim fellow citizens. This hurts.
Dr. Pascal Boniface is the founder and director of the Institute for International and Strategic Relations. He is also a consultant on strategic issues for the French defense and foreign departments.
I met him recently with members of the International Relations Committee of the Jeddah Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
He was mostly on the defensive during our exchange. The majority of French people, he insisted, are not racist. Only a small minority thinks of Islam as a problem and considers French Muslims inferior. The hijab issue was taken out of context and blown out of proportion. Most French believe in multicultural and multiracial secular society. In fact that is why they supported the hijab law!!
On the recent riots, he advised not to believe the American media. Yes, a majority of the rioters happened to be Muslims; the rest were black. But the issue was about social problems, not Islam. Solutions are on the way to address all causes of discontent, like unemployment, inequality and racism.
I asked: If Muslims form 10 percent of the population, what is their representation among decision-makers in all branches of power, including the media? And are they consulted when it comes to decisions affecting their lives?
To be honest, he said, Muslims are not represented well in the corridors of power. When Boniface was a professor in the university, few Muslims were among his students. Most joined the workforce as soon as they finished high school if not earlier. Poverty might be a reason, but there might be other causes.
The same absence can be noted among the elite. This is a real problem that needs to be addressed, urgently. Boniface said the French authorities are working on quick fixes for the social problems that produced such anger and unhappiness among the Muslim population. But we also need to look at the larger picture and work at the strategic level, he said. In a way, the riots were a blessing in disguise. Now, no one can ignore the obvious and delay actions any more. The danger is clear and present to all.
Consultations are going on with the leaders of the Muslim community on how to face radicalism and fanaticism. The same debate is going on in the elite circles. Intellectuals and experts are looking at ways to give more education, empowerment and representation to all minorities, especially the biggest, Muslims. Actions are already being taken, Boniface said. In the next election, for example, Muslims figure in the list of liberal candidates. One of them is already heading a list. In public TV and media, we are looking for better representation. Muslim and black producers, actors and presenters should get more and better opportunities. Now we have Muslim scholars appearing on public TV. More windows of opportunities are on the way ... soon.
But of course these steps are not without resistance, Boniface conceded. As you know, there are groups who feel that greater presence means stronger influence. In a democracy, governments can’t just take actions without considering all voices and opinions. Let’s hope that justice and sensibility prevail. It is high time we gave Muslims fair representation in education, government and media.
I wrote last week about how the British try to solve the problems of their Muslim minority in cooperation with Islamic councils. Meeting with Dr. Boniface was a good opportunity to check what is going on on the other side of the Match Canal.
We all have minority issues. The first step is to come out clean about them. We can’t solve a problem no matter how small if we don’t admit its existence. Thorough study must follow, involving all concerned parties, giving them equal access and respect.
Solutions are mere paperwork if not executed. This is the hardest part and it needs a strong and determined leadership to work it out.
There is no simple solution to complex problems. But the easiest and most obvious first is to communicate with the right people, the right way. Great ideas and thoughts will flow from there.
France has been a strong supporter of Arab causes after King Faisal’s state visit and crucial meeting with President Charles de Gaulle days before the 1967 Arab-Israeli War.
France’s stand against the war on Iraq and the larger US-led campaign to fight terror with terror won it lots of credit in the Arab and Muslim world. However, the pretty image was stained lately by a couple of major events: The law prohibiting hijab in public schools, and the recent riots in its poor Muslim neighborhoods. Both exposed the deep-rooted racism toward the French of Arab origin and Muslim background. As public polls showed, most French applauded the hijab ban and don’t think highly of their Muslim fellow citizens. This hurts.
Dr. Pascal Boniface is the founder and director of the Institute for International and Strategic Relations. He is also a consultant on strategic issues for the French defense and foreign departments.
I met him recently with members of the International Relations Committee of the Jeddah Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
He was mostly on the defensive during our exchange. The majority of French people, he insisted, are not racist. Only a small minority thinks of Islam as a problem and considers French Muslims inferior. The hijab issue was taken out of context and blown out of proportion. Most French believe in multicultural and multiracial secular society. In fact that is why they supported the hijab law!!
On the recent riots, he advised not to believe the American media. Yes, a majority of the rioters happened to be Muslims; the rest were black. But the issue was about social problems, not Islam. Solutions are on the way to address all causes of discontent, like unemployment, inequality and racism.
I asked: If Muslims form 10 percent of the population, what is their representation among decision-makers in all branches of power, including the media? And are they consulted when it comes to decisions affecting their lives?
To be honest, he said, Muslims are not represented well in the corridors of power. When Boniface was a professor in the university, few Muslims were among his students. Most joined the workforce as soon as they finished high school if not earlier. Poverty might be a reason, but there might be other causes.
The same absence can be noted among the elite. This is a real problem that needs to be addressed, urgently. Boniface said the French authorities are working on quick fixes for the social problems that produced such anger and unhappiness among the Muslim population. But we also need to look at the larger picture and work at the strategic level, he said. In a way, the riots were a blessing in disguise. Now, no one can ignore the obvious and delay actions any more. The danger is clear and present to all.
Consultations are going on with the leaders of the Muslim community on how to face radicalism and fanaticism. The same debate is going on in the elite circles. Intellectuals and experts are looking at ways to give more education, empowerment and representation to all minorities, especially the biggest, Muslims. Actions are already being taken, Boniface said. In the next election, for example, Muslims figure in the list of liberal candidates. One of them is already heading a list. In public TV and media, we are looking for better representation. Muslim and black producers, actors and presenters should get more and better opportunities. Now we have Muslim scholars appearing on public TV. More windows of opportunities are on the way ... soon.
But of course these steps are not without resistance, Boniface conceded. As you know, there are groups who feel that greater presence means stronger influence. In a democracy, governments can’t just take actions without considering all voices and opinions. Let’s hope that justice and sensibility prevail. It is high time we gave Muslims fair representation in education, government and media.
I wrote last week about how the British try to solve the problems of their Muslim minority in cooperation with Islamic councils. Meeting with Dr. Boniface was a good opportunity to check what is going on on the other side of the Match Canal.
We all have minority issues. The first step is to come out clean about them. We can’t solve a problem no matter how small if we don’t admit its existence. Thorough study must follow, involving all concerned parties, giving them equal access and respect.
Solutions are mere paperwork if not executed. This is the hardest part and it needs a strong and determined leadership to work it out.
There is no simple solution to complex problems. But the easiest and most obvious first is to communicate with the right people, the right way. Great ideas and thoughts will flow from there.
Wise British Moves to Tackle Domestic Radicalism
Dr. Khaled M. Batarfi
What distinguishes the experienced former empires from the new immature ones is wisdom. The wise do not act on instinct. They thoroughly investigate before they make a finding, then fully analyze before they formulate a judgment. They do hit and miss, like the rest of us, but they self-correct when they find out.
The British always strike me as wise. They have known through their long colonial history how to make the best of what they had. Of the many lessons they learnt and taught is don't jump to conclusion, don't burn bridges you may need to use, and don't sour your words less you have to eat them.
After 9-11, they made a strategic decision to ally themselves with the Americans in what came to be known as the War on Terror. They tried to moderate lots of decisions but at the end they dutifully followed in US steps, and did what they felt they had to do.
Still, their actions were always calculated to maximize benefit and minimize loss. Their profits from Iraqi contracts are high; while their domestic troubles in the areas they rule are low. They tried understanding, respect and self-discipline. Relatively speaking, they made many successes in their management of post war Iraq.
Domestically, they were wise in their relations with Arab and Muslim communities. Even after the metro bombings of 7-7, their reactions were reasonably moderate. Arab and Muslim phobia was kept at minimum. Their relations with local Islamic communities were of cooperation not confrontation. From the Royal family to the Prime Minister to concerned government officials and most media editors there were a good level of understanding and appreciation of the situation.
I just came from an organized visit to London. The Foreign Office took us, three Saudi journalists and writers, to meet with a number of officials in governmental and non-governmental organizations dealing with interfaith relations. They explained to us how they try to make sense of the participation in the metro attacks of second generation, educated and clean-record young Muslim citizens.
Instead of relying on paranoid police tactics, they went to Muslim leaders and asked for assistance. A number of councils were created to study the phenomenon. They thoroughly and patiently studied the political, social, economic and religious dimensions. The study is not over yet, almost a year after the attack, but many recommendations are already implemented. Social, educational, racial and religious discrimination that produced unemployed, unqualified and unhappy generation are now being tackled.
According to Tony Heal of the Faith Communities Unit in the Interior Ministry, many corrective steps are taken to insure better schooling, fairer treatment, and higher representation in government including the police and other security agencies.
Further wise steps include screening local and foreign imams. All had to get approval from recognized Muslim councils. Foreign and visiting imams must speak fluent English to get visas. The Council monitors mosques for immoderate teaching and radical views. They encourage the public to collaborate with the government and the Council in fighting radicalism and terrorism by avoiding and reporting suspicious activities.
All the people I met, and they were many, agreed that there are valid reasons for the problem. No one claims that terrorism is an illegal import. The relation between Al-Qaeda and the attackers is minimized, while the focus is mostly on the provoking policies like the war on Iraq and the perceived crusade against Islam and Muslims. They asked us and many others for advice and encouraged us to criticize, analyze and recommend. In searching for accurate answers you have to act humble, respectful, keen and sincere. Our hosts certainly did.
Those are wise and positive steps. Communicating, even with your enemies, is the only way to find out the whys and hows of their actions. Nobody sacrifices his life to punish the people he hates just for fun. Regardless of the validity of their anger, your enemies must have a reason. Finding out the correct answers is the first step towards understanding and resolution.
Such steps do tend to be tedious and last longer. They won’t satisfy public anger or make a leader instantly popular, but … they are the right thing to do.
I salute those who are working hard and smart on this problem. I hope the rest of us do the "same thing", the "same way."
What distinguishes the experienced former empires from the new immature ones is wisdom. The wise do not act on instinct. They thoroughly investigate before they make a finding, then fully analyze before they formulate a judgment. They do hit and miss, like the rest of us, but they self-correct when they find out.
The British always strike me as wise. They have known through their long colonial history how to make the best of what they had. Of the many lessons they learnt and taught is don't jump to conclusion, don't burn bridges you may need to use, and don't sour your words less you have to eat them.
After 9-11, they made a strategic decision to ally themselves with the Americans in what came to be known as the War on Terror. They tried to moderate lots of decisions but at the end they dutifully followed in US steps, and did what they felt they had to do.
Still, their actions were always calculated to maximize benefit and minimize loss. Their profits from Iraqi contracts are high; while their domestic troubles in the areas they rule are low. They tried understanding, respect and self-discipline. Relatively speaking, they made many successes in their management of post war Iraq.
Domestically, they were wise in their relations with Arab and Muslim communities. Even after the metro bombings of 7-7, their reactions were reasonably moderate. Arab and Muslim phobia was kept at minimum. Their relations with local Islamic communities were of cooperation not confrontation. From the Royal family to the Prime Minister to concerned government officials and most media editors there were a good level of understanding and appreciation of the situation.
I just came from an organized visit to London. The Foreign Office took us, three Saudi journalists and writers, to meet with a number of officials in governmental and non-governmental organizations dealing with interfaith relations. They explained to us how they try to make sense of the participation in the metro attacks of second generation, educated and clean-record young Muslim citizens.
Instead of relying on paranoid police tactics, they went to Muslim leaders and asked for assistance. A number of councils were created to study the phenomenon. They thoroughly and patiently studied the political, social, economic and religious dimensions. The study is not over yet, almost a year after the attack, but many recommendations are already implemented. Social, educational, racial and religious discrimination that produced unemployed, unqualified and unhappy generation are now being tackled.
According to Tony Heal of the Faith Communities Unit in the Interior Ministry, many corrective steps are taken to insure better schooling, fairer treatment, and higher representation in government including the police and other security agencies.
Further wise steps include screening local and foreign imams. All had to get approval from recognized Muslim councils. Foreign and visiting imams must speak fluent English to get visas. The Council monitors mosques for immoderate teaching and radical views. They encourage the public to collaborate with the government and the Council in fighting radicalism and terrorism by avoiding and reporting suspicious activities.
All the people I met, and they were many, agreed that there are valid reasons for the problem. No one claims that terrorism is an illegal import. The relation between Al-Qaeda and the attackers is minimized, while the focus is mostly on the provoking policies like the war on Iraq and the perceived crusade against Islam and Muslims. They asked us and many others for advice and encouraged us to criticize, analyze and recommend. In searching for accurate answers you have to act humble, respectful, keen and sincere. Our hosts certainly did.
Those are wise and positive steps. Communicating, even with your enemies, is the only way to find out the whys and hows of their actions. Nobody sacrifices his life to punish the people he hates just for fun. Regardless of the validity of their anger, your enemies must have a reason. Finding out the correct answers is the first step towards understanding and resolution.
Such steps do tend to be tedious and last longer. They won’t satisfy public anger or make a leader instantly popular, but … they are the right thing to do.
I salute those who are working hard and smart on this problem. I hope the rest of us do the "same thing", the "same way."
Do We Need Al-Hiaa?
Dr. Khaled M. Batarfi
Members of the Human Rights Committee are visiting Sheikh Algaith President of the Commission for the Prevention of Vice and Promotion of Virtue (known as Hiaa) to check some disturbing complaints.
According to Ms. Suhaila Zein Alabedeen, The newly-found nongovernmental organization is checking stories of human rights abuse by zealot commission members.
Cases include beating, imprisonment and verbal abuse of innocent couples because of unfounded suspicions of improper relations. Others complain that the commission members hunt for such relations in family sections of public places. If single men are not allowed into these areas why these members are the exception? they protest. Many were taken from malls, restaurants and streets just because they couldn't prove they were relatives.
A South African nurse was caught in a supermarket with her Lebanese boyfriend. Both were Christians shopping for Xmas. The "Hiaa" put them in its private prison for 14 days. Both were denied phone calls and access to their lawyers, embassies and companies.
It took their relatives and friends a couple of weeks to find and bail them out.
A Filipino maid with her husband and infant were caught in another market for similar suspicion. Even though the husband proved their relations, his wife was kept in prison and he was let out with the infant. A prison officer insisted she should return to her sponsor not husband. She left her sponsor because he had not given her a single salary for six months. Apparently, this wasn't enough reason to let her go, so the husband's lawyer enlisted the help of the Human Rights Commission and the media. Prince Salman, the Governor of Riyadh intervened and ordered her release.
A Saudi Doctor with his sister was leaving the market with a couple of traveling bags when an angry Hiaa member approached them. Why, he wanted to know, was the lady half covering her hair, and that under her abaya the lower parts of her legs were not covered. (How could he tell? He must have been a keen observant!) Besides, the brother must prove that she was his sister. Both should go to the Hiaa offices for further investigation and proper Islamic teaching.
To make a long story short, the brother was strong enough to insist on taking his sister home first then went to their offices to go through unforgettable confrontation. It would have been even worse if she wasn't his sister or he wasn't Saudi!
Engaged couples, colleagues, relatives and friends are caught everyday in very open, very public places on their own or in groups because the Hiaa regards this as "Khelwa". Al-Khelwa in Islam means that a man and a woman are meeting alone where no one can see them. To be in a public place automatically means you are not alone, and therefore not in Khelwa.
The problem is a matter of basic principles. Either you believe in human rights and dignity or you don't. Either you presume the best in people or the worst. Either people are innocent until proven guilty or they are all guilty until they prove their innocence. Either all people are equal under the law, foreigners of all nationalities included, or they are not. Either you take Islam as is, or you make your own version and enforce it on others.
Besides, how can one be the accuser, judge, juror, jailor and executor at the same time? How could a Hiaa member make the accusation, take the accused to his private court, judge him without the presence of a lawyer and imprison him in Hiaa jail? This is too much authority in one hand. Justice cannot be served this way even if the Hiaa members were angels, and they are not.
In the reform mode we are in, it is about time we fix this problem. I don't advocate the scrapping of Hiaa. We do need them. They do a lot of good work in promoting Islamic values and preventing vice, as they are supposed to do. But these duties have to be regulated, and performed in civilized manner. Human rights and due process have to be observed. Thos who cross the line and abuse their authority must be disciplined. Punishment should fit the crime—no exceptions allowed.
Members of the Human Rights Committee are visiting Sheikh Algaith President of the Commission for the Prevention of Vice and Promotion of Virtue (known as Hiaa) to check some disturbing complaints.
According to Ms. Suhaila Zein Alabedeen, The newly-found nongovernmental organization is checking stories of human rights abuse by zealot commission members.
Cases include beating, imprisonment and verbal abuse of innocent couples because of unfounded suspicions of improper relations. Others complain that the commission members hunt for such relations in family sections of public places. If single men are not allowed into these areas why these members are the exception? they protest. Many were taken from malls, restaurants and streets just because they couldn't prove they were relatives.
A South African nurse was caught in a supermarket with her Lebanese boyfriend. Both were Christians shopping for Xmas. The "Hiaa" put them in its private prison for 14 days. Both were denied phone calls and access to their lawyers, embassies and companies.
It took their relatives and friends a couple of weeks to find and bail them out.
A Filipino maid with her husband and infant were caught in another market for similar suspicion. Even though the husband proved their relations, his wife was kept in prison and he was let out with the infant. A prison officer insisted she should return to her sponsor not husband. She left her sponsor because he had not given her a single salary for six months. Apparently, this wasn't enough reason to let her go, so the husband's lawyer enlisted the help of the Human Rights Commission and the media. Prince Salman, the Governor of Riyadh intervened and ordered her release.
A Saudi Doctor with his sister was leaving the market with a couple of traveling bags when an angry Hiaa member approached them. Why, he wanted to know, was the lady half covering her hair, and that under her abaya the lower parts of her legs were not covered. (How could he tell? He must have been a keen observant!) Besides, the brother must prove that she was his sister. Both should go to the Hiaa offices for further investigation and proper Islamic teaching.
To make a long story short, the brother was strong enough to insist on taking his sister home first then went to their offices to go through unforgettable confrontation. It would have been even worse if she wasn't his sister or he wasn't Saudi!
Engaged couples, colleagues, relatives and friends are caught everyday in very open, very public places on their own or in groups because the Hiaa regards this as "Khelwa". Al-Khelwa in Islam means that a man and a woman are meeting alone where no one can see them. To be in a public place automatically means you are not alone, and therefore not in Khelwa.
The problem is a matter of basic principles. Either you believe in human rights and dignity or you don't. Either you presume the best in people or the worst. Either people are innocent until proven guilty or they are all guilty until they prove their innocence. Either all people are equal under the law, foreigners of all nationalities included, or they are not. Either you take Islam as is, or you make your own version and enforce it on others.
Besides, how can one be the accuser, judge, juror, jailor and executor at the same time? How could a Hiaa member make the accusation, take the accused to his private court, judge him without the presence of a lawyer and imprison him in Hiaa jail? This is too much authority in one hand. Justice cannot be served this way even if the Hiaa members were angels, and they are not.
In the reform mode we are in, it is about time we fix this problem. I don't advocate the scrapping of Hiaa. We do need them. They do a lot of good work in promoting Islamic values and preventing vice, as they are supposed to do. But these duties have to be regulated, and performed in civilized manner. Human rights and due process have to be observed. Thos who cross the line and abuse their authority must be disciplined. Punishment should fit the crime—no exceptions allowed.
Sunday, March 05, 2006
Lessons of Riyadh Book Fair
(Islam is about freedom and choice. To drive the entire faith into the narrow interpretations of a single school is simply un-Islamic.)
Dr. Khaled M. Batarfi
This year's Riyadh Book Fair was eventful—mostly unwelcome events, though. Somehow, the fundamentalists found it an opportunity to flex their muscles and prove a point. They wanted all to know that no matter how far we progress on the road of women and minority rights, speech and press freedoms, democracy and all, they are still in a strong position of influence. But they went too far, this time.
According to press reports, members and volunteers of the Institution of Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice were in force everywhere. In the family days, where single men are not allowed, they were the exception. Carrying sticks and wielding religious authority, they went around telling women to cover their faces, wear "abaeas" (black cloak) over their heads in one piece, rather than two—head scarf and body cover. In some instances, they told salesmen in book stands not to smile or joke when talking to women. A man holding the hand of his half-blind wife was told not to show affection in public.
When people tried to argue, in peaceful way, (there was no alternative anyway!), they were harshly told to just follow orders. Women were telling them that in Islam there are different schools of thoughts. Only one says women should cover their faces. Salesmen were trying to explain that they are supposed to be nice to customers. A husband argued that he was holding hands with his wife, not a girl friend. Besides, he explained, with her eyes troubles, she could easily lose her way in the crowded place. Nothing worked with these people. They felt they were there to perform a strict divine duty not to convince people or convey messages.
During the same event, a number of Saudi intellectuals were harassed, verbally, and almost physically. The fundamentalists came early on, occupied most of the hall, and went on the offence as soon as the lecture started.
In the main lecture hall, two ministers and a number of intellectuals were attacked for their known liberal or Sofi views. Then a tensed aggressive group surrounded them threateningly. They had to be saved by security. In the women section, another intellectual was threatened and verbally abused. Writer Fawzia Albaker was taken home in tears.
These people didn't come to listen, learn and discuss. They came to teach lessons and make statements. They were not prepared to take other views into consideration, or allow for the possibility of misunderstanding, miscommunication or even errors on their side. Many came from positions of authority and influence. They include university professors, school teachers and mosques' imams.
This can't be good, especially in such event. In this time and place, when the whole country is moving towards modernity, globalization, democracy and reforms, we still have people going around with sticks and divine authority to enforce their narrow view of the world. They only represent a minority of the Muslim World and behave like there is no Islam but theirs.
As a result we get people doing what they are told regardless of what they believe: women wearing what they must at home and extremely different abroad, youth following the strict rules when watched, and breaking all when alone; and a whole society in a state of schizophrenia. We don't have cinemas but our satellite dishes can bring us the world's best and worst. We can't mix in public, but many go from one liberal party to another. Single men cannot enter malls, but they find ways to meet with girls behind closed doors. Banned books and intellectual materials can always be had via the net and from neighboring countries, such as Dubai, Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt and Yemen. It is an indication that most visitors of book fairs in Arab countries come from Saudi. We hunt books that should have been available to us, without having to travel around to get them.
We can't go on like this. You can't drive down two crossed road at the same time. Either you decide to open your windows to the winds or to live in a closed underground cave. You are part of this world or you are not. Since you don't have an option anyway, better be serious and sincere about it.
Islam is about freedom and choice. You become Muslim with your own free will. Then you choose to understand the message according to any interpretation of the multiple mathhabs and their different schools of thought. To drive the entire faith into the narrow interpretations of a single school is simply un-Islamic.
The experience of Riyadh Fair Book should alarm us. These people crossed the most revered Islamic lines and should be punished. We should also make sure that no one else dare to cross them again.
Dr. Khaled M. Batarfi
This year's Riyadh Book Fair was eventful—mostly unwelcome events, though. Somehow, the fundamentalists found it an opportunity to flex their muscles and prove a point. They wanted all to know that no matter how far we progress on the road of women and minority rights, speech and press freedoms, democracy and all, they are still in a strong position of influence. But they went too far, this time.
According to press reports, members and volunteers of the Institution of Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice were in force everywhere. In the family days, where single men are not allowed, they were the exception. Carrying sticks and wielding religious authority, they went around telling women to cover their faces, wear "abaeas" (black cloak) over their heads in one piece, rather than two—head scarf and body cover. In some instances, they told salesmen in book stands not to smile or joke when talking to women. A man holding the hand of his half-blind wife was told not to show affection in public.
When people tried to argue, in peaceful way, (there was no alternative anyway!), they were harshly told to just follow orders. Women were telling them that in Islam there are different schools of thoughts. Only one says women should cover their faces. Salesmen were trying to explain that they are supposed to be nice to customers. A husband argued that he was holding hands with his wife, not a girl friend. Besides, he explained, with her eyes troubles, she could easily lose her way in the crowded place. Nothing worked with these people. They felt they were there to perform a strict divine duty not to convince people or convey messages.
During the same event, a number of Saudi intellectuals were harassed, verbally, and almost physically. The fundamentalists came early on, occupied most of the hall, and went on the offence as soon as the lecture started.
In the main lecture hall, two ministers and a number of intellectuals were attacked for their known liberal or Sofi views. Then a tensed aggressive group surrounded them threateningly. They had to be saved by security. In the women section, another intellectual was threatened and verbally abused. Writer Fawzia Albaker was taken home in tears.
These people didn't come to listen, learn and discuss. They came to teach lessons and make statements. They were not prepared to take other views into consideration, or allow for the possibility of misunderstanding, miscommunication or even errors on their side. Many came from positions of authority and influence. They include university professors, school teachers and mosques' imams.
This can't be good, especially in such event. In this time and place, when the whole country is moving towards modernity, globalization, democracy and reforms, we still have people going around with sticks and divine authority to enforce their narrow view of the world. They only represent a minority of the Muslim World and behave like there is no Islam but theirs.
As a result we get people doing what they are told regardless of what they believe: women wearing what they must at home and extremely different abroad, youth following the strict rules when watched, and breaking all when alone; and a whole society in a state of schizophrenia. We don't have cinemas but our satellite dishes can bring us the world's best and worst. We can't mix in public, but many go from one liberal party to another. Single men cannot enter malls, but they find ways to meet with girls behind closed doors. Banned books and intellectual materials can always be had via the net and from neighboring countries, such as Dubai, Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt and Yemen. It is an indication that most visitors of book fairs in Arab countries come from Saudi. We hunt books that should have been available to us, without having to travel around to get them.
We can't go on like this. You can't drive down two crossed road at the same time. Either you decide to open your windows to the winds or to live in a closed underground cave. You are part of this world or you are not. Since you don't have an option anyway, better be serious and sincere about it.
Islam is about freedom and choice. You become Muslim with your own free will. Then you choose to understand the message according to any interpretation of the multiple mathhabs and their different schools of thought. To drive the entire faith into the narrow interpretations of a single school is simply un-Islamic.
The experience of Riyadh Fair Book should alarm us. These people crossed the most revered Islamic lines and should be punished. We should also make sure that no one else dare to cross them again.
Saturday, February 25, 2006
Civilized Dialogue Starts at Early Age
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
Civilized dialogue is better taught at early age. Dr. Sami Angawi agreed. But unlike most of us, he decided to do something positive about what he believes in.
In his weekly “diwania”, called “Makkia” (after the holy city of Makkah), members can be as young as five years old. As part of a concentrated effort, they get training during the week on how to present themselves, and how to argue a case without getting personal. On Tuesdays, they practice, real-time, in the Makkia.
In a mixed but creatively segregated environment, women and men, young and old, sit together to talk, listen and discuss.
I attended last week’s meeting as a moderator. The discussion guest, Rajaa Al-Sanae, writer of the controversial novel “Girls of Riyadh”, couldn’t like it more. For the first time, she was surrounded by readers of all ages and sexes to discuss her book in an open, but professionally organized environment.
Evenly divided, the hall was occupied at the dimly lighted back by our better halves, wearing hijab. The other part was the men’s section. Men and women faced each other, but women could see us in the more lighted section better than we could see them. In addition, those who were men-shy could sit behind some sort of parting curtain. Rajaa sat in the middle.
We started by fielding comments from the older members and guests, but quickly turned the platform to the younger crowd. They were beautiful. Their comments and questions were well studied and prepared.
The kids came for training a couple of days earlier. They all had to read the book as homework. It showed. The younger people were even better than the older ones in the way they articulated their thoughts, built up their arguments, and presented their questions and comments.
I was impressed. This is exactly what I have been calling for. Our schools should do better, providing classes in dialogue and forums for debate. More important, we must allow them to speak up their minds. At home, class, mosque, they should be given the chance to formulate their own opinion, make up their own stand and decide for themselves what they want to achieve and be.
We shouldn’t interfere in every part of their lives. We can’t keep telling them from childhood to adulthood what to think, read, study, what future to choose, and whom to marry. If we do, we end up with followers but no leaders. Those who only know how to follow orders can’t hope for a bright future.
I was happy to see these kids differ in what they thought of a novel. Then remembered that the same book was published abroad, sold all over the world, but not where it really matters. Even in Riyadh Book Fair, this month, where all censored books of Ghazi Al-Gosaibi and Turki Al-Hamad were released for the first time, the book was taken off shelves. Four hundred books were permitted but then confiscated without explanation!
Banning books is widespread. Even in academic libraries, books are banned. Reasons, vary. The ban not only includes what is regarded as ideologically incorrect, but also the politically, socially and literally imperfect. With such a wide net, even our college students are not allowed self-determination. That’s why they shy away from scientific research and prefer, if not demand, textbooks at all levels, including doctoral.
Professors, including graduates of Western universities, have to oblige.
As a result, we get carbon copies of future leaders. They study the same thing, the same way, and reach the same conclusions. When they study abroad, they carry their package with them. It confuses them when asked to look for information and make up their minds about it. They find it hard to argue with their professors. Where they came from, it is one-way street dialogue. They sat at the listening end, respectfully, and trustfully — no argument allowed.
Then comes the really hard part — debate. This is what Dr. Sami, an American schools graduate, found lacking and tried fixing. To find yourself in a multicultural environment is hard enough. To have to make a constructive dialogue with men and women of all ages, thoughts, and background is too much for many.
What to do about it? The next National Dialogue Forum is about our outdated curriculum, and how to improve it. I suggest we transform the entire system to be based on free thought, open research and civilized dialogue. We have wasted ages and generations; we can’t afford to waste any more.
Civilized dialogue is better taught at early age. Dr. Sami Angawi agreed. But unlike most of us, he decided to do something positive about what he believes in.
In his weekly “diwania”, called “Makkia” (after the holy city of Makkah), members can be as young as five years old. As part of a concentrated effort, they get training during the week on how to present themselves, and how to argue a case without getting personal. On Tuesdays, they practice, real-time, in the Makkia.
In a mixed but creatively segregated environment, women and men, young and old, sit together to talk, listen and discuss.
I attended last week’s meeting as a moderator. The discussion guest, Rajaa Al-Sanae, writer of the controversial novel “Girls of Riyadh”, couldn’t like it more. For the first time, she was surrounded by readers of all ages and sexes to discuss her book in an open, but professionally organized environment.
Evenly divided, the hall was occupied at the dimly lighted back by our better halves, wearing hijab. The other part was the men’s section. Men and women faced each other, but women could see us in the more lighted section better than we could see them. In addition, those who were men-shy could sit behind some sort of parting curtain. Rajaa sat in the middle.
We started by fielding comments from the older members and guests, but quickly turned the platform to the younger crowd. They were beautiful. Their comments and questions were well studied and prepared.
The kids came for training a couple of days earlier. They all had to read the book as homework. It showed. The younger people were even better than the older ones in the way they articulated their thoughts, built up their arguments, and presented their questions and comments.
I was impressed. This is exactly what I have been calling for. Our schools should do better, providing classes in dialogue and forums for debate. More important, we must allow them to speak up their minds. At home, class, mosque, they should be given the chance to formulate their own opinion, make up their own stand and decide for themselves what they want to achieve and be.
We shouldn’t interfere in every part of their lives. We can’t keep telling them from childhood to adulthood what to think, read, study, what future to choose, and whom to marry. If we do, we end up with followers but no leaders. Those who only know how to follow orders can’t hope for a bright future.
I was happy to see these kids differ in what they thought of a novel. Then remembered that the same book was published abroad, sold all over the world, but not where it really matters. Even in Riyadh Book Fair, this month, where all censored books of Ghazi Al-Gosaibi and Turki Al-Hamad were released for the first time, the book was taken off shelves. Four hundred books were permitted but then confiscated without explanation!
Banning books is widespread. Even in academic libraries, books are banned. Reasons, vary. The ban not only includes what is regarded as ideologically incorrect, but also the politically, socially and literally imperfect. With such a wide net, even our college students are not allowed self-determination. That’s why they shy away from scientific research and prefer, if not demand, textbooks at all levels, including doctoral.
Professors, including graduates of Western universities, have to oblige.
As a result, we get carbon copies of future leaders. They study the same thing, the same way, and reach the same conclusions. When they study abroad, they carry their package with them. It confuses them when asked to look for information and make up their minds about it. They find it hard to argue with their professors. Where they came from, it is one-way street dialogue. They sat at the listening end, respectfully, and trustfully — no argument allowed.
Then comes the really hard part — debate. This is what Dr. Sami, an American schools graduate, found lacking and tried fixing. To find yourself in a multicultural environment is hard enough. To have to make a constructive dialogue with men and women of all ages, thoughts, and background is too much for many.
What to do about it? The next National Dialogue Forum is about our outdated curriculum, and how to improve it. I suggest we transform the entire system to be based on free thought, open research and civilized dialogue. We have wasted ages and generations; we can’t afford to waste any more.
Sunday, February 19, 2006
Saudi Women, Opportunities and the Road Ahead
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
The 20-member group of intellectuals who went before the visit of King Abdullah to China consisted mostly of women. One of them, Aljohrah Alsodairy (23), spoke fluent Chinese. They made waves and charmed the Chinese with their excellent quality and positive attitude.
Reem Al-Faisal, world-class photographer, was in China three months ago, hobbling from one town to another, six in all, in the Yunnan Province, south of China to show her Haj photo collection. In the last decade, she showed her talent in at least ten cities in Europe, Asia and the Arab world. Her work was published and praised in prominent journals like Le Monde, Le Figaro, The Guardian, Liberation, Canvas and Marie Claire.
•••
The Seventh Jeddah Economic Forum has just ended. More than 2,700 delegates attended. About a fourth were women, mostly Saudi. Most organizers and welcoming committees were college girls. The presence of women in business, media and academia was very much felt and appreciated. Effat College for girls alone provided tens of young organizers.
Etimad Abdulaziz Al-Noaim is a young Saudi journalist. This was her first assignment. She did extraordinarily well. In a matter of three days she was transformed from a shy girl to a confident professional woman. Her writing and communication talents shined all of a sudden. Her enthusiasm was contagious. She will never forget this opportunity.
Ranya Bajsair is the coordinator of the Foreign Relations Committee at the Jeddah Chamber of Commerce and Industry (JCCI), the forum organizer. Trained in Swiss schools for eleven years, fluent in three languages, and a holder of a Master’s degree in business administration, Ranya was responsible for the VIP stage room. Ranya prepared note speakers before they faced the audience and made a great impression.
•••
Rajaa Alsanae, the young girl who wrote the controversial, best-seller novel, “The Girls of Riyadh,” was in town discussing her book with readers, men and women, old and young. She was treated like the respected intellectual she is, not a scandalous novelist, as some critics depicted her for describing the secret lives of four high-class young girls. All characters, of both sexes, were shown as victims of the known but adamantly denied ills of our society.
These ills include the way we regard and treat our better halves as dependents, not equal partners. Because of such an attitude, too many of us have not cared much to let our girls independently develop their character, education, skills and careers.
Our social, educational, legal, political and civil systems were designed in a way that made it harder for talented, aspiring and independent women to make their presence, contribution and partnership in the development of their nation. How could a woman make it to the top, if her education and training options are so limited, work environment so restricted, and job opportunities so few?
Rajaa visited the Khadija bint Khuwailed Women Center at the JCCI. She was warmly greeted and encouraged by three elected and appointed female board members: Madawi Alhasoon, Lama Al-Suleiman and Olfat Al-Kabbani. Dr. Nadia Baeshen, the center’s founder and manger, explained to us how education and training figured in their pioneering project. In the job market of today, only the better skilled and well prepared can compete. Computer, foreign languages, communication skills are among the highest in demand. It was not by chance that the center provides intensive, updated and advanced training courses in these areas.
What do these events have in common? They are all about women empowerment. I am more optimistic today than any time in our recent history about women’s place in our society. We made surprisingly smooth and successful steps down this road. King Abdullah made it a mark of his reign to give women their voice, space and opportunities. They seem to get the message and move ahead in sure, if not fast, steps to claim their rights. We have been waiting for the opening of this window for a long, long time. Wasting it is not an option.
The 20-member group of intellectuals who went before the visit of King Abdullah to China consisted mostly of women. One of them, Aljohrah Alsodairy (23), spoke fluent Chinese. They made waves and charmed the Chinese with their excellent quality and positive attitude.
Reem Al-Faisal, world-class photographer, was in China three months ago, hobbling from one town to another, six in all, in the Yunnan Province, south of China to show her Haj photo collection. In the last decade, she showed her talent in at least ten cities in Europe, Asia and the Arab world. Her work was published and praised in prominent journals like Le Monde, Le Figaro, The Guardian, Liberation, Canvas and Marie Claire.
•••
The Seventh Jeddah Economic Forum has just ended. More than 2,700 delegates attended. About a fourth were women, mostly Saudi. Most organizers and welcoming committees were college girls. The presence of women in business, media and academia was very much felt and appreciated. Effat College for girls alone provided tens of young organizers.
Etimad Abdulaziz Al-Noaim is a young Saudi journalist. This was her first assignment. She did extraordinarily well. In a matter of three days she was transformed from a shy girl to a confident professional woman. Her writing and communication talents shined all of a sudden. Her enthusiasm was contagious. She will never forget this opportunity.
Ranya Bajsair is the coordinator of the Foreign Relations Committee at the Jeddah Chamber of Commerce and Industry (JCCI), the forum organizer. Trained in Swiss schools for eleven years, fluent in three languages, and a holder of a Master’s degree in business administration, Ranya was responsible for the VIP stage room. Ranya prepared note speakers before they faced the audience and made a great impression.
•••
Rajaa Alsanae, the young girl who wrote the controversial, best-seller novel, “The Girls of Riyadh,” was in town discussing her book with readers, men and women, old and young. She was treated like the respected intellectual she is, not a scandalous novelist, as some critics depicted her for describing the secret lives of four high-class young girls. All characters, of both sexes, were shown as victims of the known but adamantly denied ills of our society.
These ills include the way we regard and treat our better halves as dependents, not equal partners. Because of such an attitude, too many of us have not cared much to let our girls independently develop their character, education, skills and careers.
Our social, educational, legal, political and civil systems were designed in a way that made it harder for talented, aspiring and independent women to make their presence, contribution and partnership in the development of their nation. How could a woman make it to the top, if her education and training options are so limited, work environment so restricted, and job opportunities so few?
Rajaa visited the Khadija bint Khuwailed Women Center at the JCCI. She was warmly greeted and encouraged by three elected and appointed female board members: Madawi Alhasoon, Lama Al-Suleiman and Olfat Al-Kabbani. Dr. Nadia Baeshen, the center’s founder and manger, explained to us how education and training figured in their pioneering project. In the job market of today, only the better skilled and well prepared can compete. Computer, foreign languages, communication skills are among the highest in demand. It was not by chance that the center provides intensive, updated and advanced training courses in these areas.
What do these events have in common? They are all about women empowerment. I am more optimistic today than any time in our recent history about women’s place in our society. We made surprisingly smooth and successful steps down this road. King Abdullah made it a mark of his reign to give women their voice, space and opportunities. They seem to get the message and move ahead in sure, if not fast, steps to claim their rights. We have been waiting for the opening of this window for a long, long time. Wasting it is not an option.
Saudi Women, Opportunities and the Road Ahead
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
The 20-member group of intellectuals who went before the visit of King Abdullah to China consisted mostly of women. One of them, Aljohrah Alsodairy (23), spoke fluent Chinese. They made waves and charmed the Chinese with their excellent quality and positive attitude.
Reem Al-Faisal, world-class photographer, was in China three months ago, hobbling from one town to another, six in all, in the Yunnan Province, south of China to show her Haj photo collection. In the last decade, she showed her talent in at least ten cities in Europe, Asia and the Arab world. Her work was published and praised in prominent journals like Le Monde, Le Figaro, The Guardian, Liberation, Canvas and Marie Claire.
•••
The Seventh Jeddah Economic Forum has just ended. More than 2,700 delegates attended. About a fourth were women, mostly Saudi. Most organizers and welcoming committees were college girls. The presence of women in business, media and academia was very much felt and appreciated. Effat College for girls alone provided tens of young organizers.
Etimad Abdulaziz Al-Noaim is a young Saudi journalist. This was her first assignment. She did extraordinarily well. In a matter of three days she was transformed from a shy girl to a confident professional woman. Her writing and communication talents shined all of a sudden. Her enthusiasm was contagious. She will never forget this opportunity.
Ranya Bajsair is the coordinator of the Foreign Relations Committee at the Jeddah Chamber of Commerce and Industry (JCCI), the forum organizer. Trained in Swiss schools for eleven years, fluent in three languages, and a holder of a Master’s degree in business administration, Ranya was responsible for the VIP stage room. Ranya prepared note speakers before they faced the audience and made a great impression.
•••
Rajaa Alsanae, the young girl who wrote the controversial, best-seller novel, “The Girls of Riyadh,” was in town discussing her book with readers, men and women, old and young. She was treated like the respected intellectual she is, not a scandalous novelist, as some critics depicted her for describing the secret lives of four high-class young girls. All characters, of both sexes, were shown as victims of the known but adamantly denied ills of our society.
These ills include the way we regard and treat our better halves as dependents, not equal partners. Because of such an attitude, too many of us have not cared much to let our girls independently develop their character, education, skills and careers.
Our social, educational, legal, political and civil systems were designed in a way that made it harder for talented, aspiring and independent women to make their presence, contribution and partnership in the development of their nation. How could a woman make it to the top, if her education and training options are so limited, work environment so restricted, and job opportunities so few?
Rajaa visited the Khadija bint Khuwailed Women Center at the JCCI. She was warmly greeted and encouraged by three elected and appointed female board members: Madawi Alhasoon, Lama Al-Suleiman and Olfat Al-Kabbani. Dr. Nadia Baeshen, the center’s founder and manger, explained to us how education and training figured in their pioneering project. In the job market of today, only the better skilled and well prepared can compete. Computer, foreign languages, communication skills are among the highest in demand. It was not by chance that the center provides intensive, updated and advanced training courses in these areas.
What do these events have in common? They are all about women empowerment. I am more optimistic today than any time in our recent history about women’s place in our society. We made surprisingly smooth and successful steps down this road. King Abdullah made it a mark of his reign to give women their voice, space and opportunities. They seem to get the message and move ahead in sure, if not fast, steps to claim their rights. We have been waiting for the opening of this window for a long, long time. Wasting it is not an option.
The 20-member group of intellectuals who went before the visit of King Abdullah to China consisted mostly of women. One of them, Aljohrah Alsodairy (23), spoke fluent Chinese. They made waves and charmed the Chinese with their excellent quality and positive attitude.
Reem Al-Faisal, world-class photographer, was in China three months ago, hobbling from one town to another, six in all, in the Yunnan Province, south of China to show her Haj photo collection. In the last decade, she showed her talent in at least ten cities in Europe, Asia and the Arab world. Her work was published and praised in prominent journals like Le Monde, Le Figaro, The Guardian, Liberation, Canvas and Marie Claire.
•••
The Seventh Jeddah Economic Forum has just ended. More than 2,700 delegates attended. About a fourth were women, mostly Saudi. Most organizers and welcoming committees were college girls. The presence of women in business, media and academia was very much felt and appreciated. Effat College for girls alone provided tens of young organizers.
Etimad Abdulaziz Al-Noaim is a young Saudi journalist. This was her first assignment. She did extraordinarily well. In a matter of three days she was transformed from a shy girl to a confident professional woman. Her writing and communication talents shined all of a sudden. Her enthusiasm was contagious. She will never forget this opportunity.
Ranya Bajsair is the coordinator of the Foreign Relations Committee at the Jeddah Chamber of Commerce and Industry (JCCI), the forum organizer. Trained in Swiss schools for eleven years, fluent in three languages, and a holder of a Master’s degree in business administration, Ranya was responsible for the VIP stage room. Ranya prepared note speakers before they faced the audience and made a great impression.
•••
Rajaa Alsanae, the young girl who wrote the controversial, best-seller novel, “The Girls of Riyadh,” was in town discussing her book with readers, men and women, old and young. She was treated like the respected intellectual she is, not a scandalous novelist, as some critics depicted her for describing the secret lives of four high-class young girls. All characters, of both sexes, were shown as victims of the known but adamantly denied ills of our society.
These ills include the way we regard and treat our better halves as dependents, not equal partners. Because of such an attitude, too many of us have not cared much to let our girls independently develop their character, education, skills and careers.
Our social, educational, legal, political and civil systems were designed in a way that made it harder for talented, aspiring and independent women to make their presence, contribution and partnership in the development of their nation. How could a woman make it to the top, if her education and training options are so limited, work environment so restricted, and job opportunities so few?
Rajaa visited the Khadija bint Khuwailed Women Center at the JCCI. She was warmly greeted and encouraged by three elected and appointed female board members: Madawi Alhasoon, Lama Al-Suleiman and Olfat Al-Kabbani. Dr. Nadia Baeshen, the center’s founder and manger, explained to us how education and training figured in their pioneering project. In the job market of today, only the better skilled and well prepared can compete. Computer, foreign languages, communication skills are among the highest in demand. It was not by chance that the center provides intensive, updated and advanced training courses in these areas.
What do these events have in common? They are all about women empowerment. I am more optimistic today than any time in our recent history about women’s place in our society. We made surprisingly smooth and successful steps down this road. King Abdullah made it a mark of his reign to give women their voice, space and opportunities. They seem to get the message and move ahead in sure, if not fast, steps to claim their rights. We have been waiting for the opening of this window for a long, long time. Wasting it is not an option.
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
Confusing Hate Speech With Freedom of Expression, Again!
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
Many commented on my last column about the difference between freedom of expression and hate speech. Some are still confused about the issue and couldn’t understand the strong Muslim response. But before I give a summary of the main arguments advanced by some of my readers, here’s some “breaking news” from Denmark.
According to MediaGuardian.co.uk, Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that first published the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), refused to run drawings making fun of Jesus Christ three years ago, on the grounds that they could be offensive to readers and were not funny.
In April 2003, Danish illustrator Christoffer Zieler submitted a series of unsolicited cartoons dealing with the resurrection of Christ to Jyllands-Posten. He received an e-mail back from the paper’s Sunday editor, Jens Kaiser, which said: “I don’t think Jyllands-Posten’s readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them.”
The illustrator told the Norwegian daily Dagbladet, which saw the e-mail, he felt Jyllands-Posten rated the feelings of its Christian readers higher than that of its Muslim readers.
No comment! Now, let’s go back to some of the comments. I’ve discussed this issue with dozens of people in the West, including many in the US and Europe, and the overwhelming response is curiosity and cynicism.
Three trains of thought seem to come up the most: 1) In the West, Christians and Jews are mocked and insulted in articles and cartoons all the time.
This usually leads to many angry letters to the editors and public debate on talk radio and cable news. It never leads to violence and destruction. Freedom of religion also means that others don’t have to live by the rules of your religion.
2) The claim that hate speech toward religion is causing this rage seems bogus, since the Arab and Muslim press routinely prints horribly vile cartoons about Jews. This leads many to believe that this whole controversy is being contrived by anti-Western imams, or others with an agenda that includes attacking the West or causing a distraction, (Syria and Iran for example).
3) Don’t Muslims see the irony that in response to cartoons claiming an inherent link between Islam and terrorism, they commit acts of terrorism?
It seems many still don’t get it. You can’t compare the holiest man in Islam with Hitler, Statue of Liberty and Uncle Sam but to Jesus, Moses and Mary (peace be upon them). And you don’t compare apples to oranges. The Holocaust is an event, not a prophet.
The Western media is full of negative depictions of Islam and Muslims in movies, talk shows, news analyses and commentary, especially after Sept. 11.
But they never generated the outcry the Danish caricatures of the Prophet did.
I am against any stereotyping and targeting of people of any race or faith, in any part of the world.
That’s why I am calling for widening the scope of the anti-Semitism laws that protect Jews to include the rest of us. Can anyone explain to me why not?
Many commented on my last column about the difference between freedom of expression and hate speech. Some are still confused about the issue and couldn’t understand the strong Muslim response. But before I give a summary of the main arguments advanced by some of my readers, here’s some “breaking news” from Denmark.
According to MediaGuardian.co.uk, Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that first published the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), refused to run drawings making fun of Jesus Christ three years ago, on the grounds that they could be offensive to readers and were not funny.
In April 2003, Danish illustrator Christoffer Zieler submitted a series of unsolicited cartoons dealing with the resurrection of Christ to Jyllands-Posten. He received an e-mail back from the paper’s Sunday editor, Jens Kaiser, which said: “I don’t think Jyllands-Posten’s readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them.”
The illustrator told the Norwegian daily Dagbladet, which saw the e-mail, he felt Jyllands-Posten rated the feelings of its Christian readers higher than that of its Muslim readers.
No comment! Now, let’s go back to some of the comments. I’ve discussed this issue with dozens of people in the West, including many in the US and Europe, and the overwhelming response is curiosity and cynicism.
Three trains of thought seem to come up the most: 1) In the West, Christians and Jews are mocked and insulted in articles and cartoons all the time.
This usually leads to many angry letters to the editors and public debate on talk radio and cable news. It never leads to violence and destruction. Freedom of religion also means that others don’t have to live by the rules of your religion.
2) The claim that hate speech toward religion is causing this rage seems bogus, since the Arab and Muslim press routinely prints horribly vile cartoons about Jews. This leads many to believe that this whole controversy is being contrived by anti-Western imams, or others with an agenda that includes attacking the West or causing a distraction, (Syria and Iran for example).
3) Don’t Muslims see the irony that in response to cartoons claiming an inherent link between Islam and terrorism, they commit acts of terrorism?
It seems many still don’t get it. You can’t compare the holiest man in Islam with Hitler, Statue of Liberty and Uncle Sam but to Jesus, Moses and Mary (peace be upon them). And you don’t compare apples to oranges. The Holocaust is an event, not a prophet.
The Western media is full of negative depictions of Islam and Muslims in movies, talk shows, news analyses and commentary, especially after Sept. 11.
But they never generated the outcry the Danish caricatures of the Prophet did.
I am against any stereotyping and targeting of people of any race or faith, in any part of the world.
That’s why I am calling for widening the scope of the anti-Semitism laws that protect Jews to include the rest of us. Can anyone explain to me why not?
Sunday, February 05, 2006
Hate Speech in the Guise of Freedom of Expression
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
“Freedom of expression is important, but so is respect for other people.” This was the opinion of Danish Vice Prime Minister Bendt Bendtsen in an interview with daily Jyllands-Posten about the paper’s action in publishing 12 demeaning caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) that has pitted Denmark against the Muslim world.
“Freedom of speech is an important right, but it also carried with it an obligation to use good judgment,” he contended. “What Jyllands-Posten did is totally legal. I’ve got nothing against freedom of speech — it is important for us all — but if it can offend and hurt a lot of people, why use freedom of speech for that? This is about respecting other people’s cultures.”
Bendtsen reminded: “It was not unheard of for Danes to get upset over misused religious symbols: Two summers ago, a grocery store was forced to stop selling flip-flops with pictures of Jesus after religious groups complained.”
“Danish newspapers could possibly learn something from US newspapers, which tended not to try to push the limits of what was permissible,” he advised. “In the US, freedom of expression is also important. At the same time, there is also a tradition of showing consideration for others.”
I don’t think I can put it any better. It is amazing, though, that he needed to state the obvious.
The editors of the Norwegian, Danish, French and Jordanian newspapers that published the caricatures have something in common. They run small-time newspapers, and were probably trying to make waves, build up reputation and boost sales. This might sound cynical, but it is much better than the alternative explanation — religious hatred. One can’t call what these papers did an exercise of “maximum free speech”, as the Danish paper’s editor put it. If so, why not start with your own? Muslims believe in and respect all of Allah’s prophets and messengers and would not tolerate disgracing any of them.
If practicing “maximum free speech” was the real motive, then there are other ways to flex your muscles. Try, for example, casting a single shade of doubt on the “official” number of the Holocaust victims. People get imprisoned, fired and their character assassinated for discussing the issue.
Denmark and Norway are among the few European nations that have clean history with the Muslim “Ummah.” They didn’t join in the Crusades. They never colonized Muslim lands. They didn’t help in the creation and support of Israel. They took no part in the so-called “war on terror” against Arab and Muslim nations. Therefore, they have never been on any black list of the terrorists, the anti-Western, or anti-globalization activists.
With such a clean record, spotless history and profitable business relations with over 1,200 million Muslims, you expect Danish leaders to be wiser.
Why would the queen, prime minister and conservative Christian groups go out of their way to squander all these fortunes?
Why would they, out of the blue, insist on inflaming Muslim passions with mindless, hurtful, hateful statements and caricatures?
What is the cultural, intellectual value of depicting the holiest symbol of a fifth of the world’s population as a suicidal bomber, womanizer and terrorist ?
Hate speech got the world into its worst conflicts and wars, most on ideological grounds — Christian Crusades, European holy wars, Muslim sectarian civil wars, World War I and II, down to recent conflicts in Ireland, Bosnia, Chechnya, Lebanon, Rwanda, Kosovo and neocon “crusade” on terror. Hate speech killed millions of Native Americans, blacks, Armenians, Jews, Bosnians, Indian untouchables, Chinese and Cambodian intellectuals, Chechens, Gypsies, and Kosovars. All started with some hateful doctrine based on race or ideological superiority, such as Nazism, Zionism, white supremacy and Mao’s Cultural Revolution. By dehumanizing and demonizing the other, it makes you feel superior and helps you rally your own behind a cause. It also justifies your acts of aggression, suppression and injustice.
So, what could and should the civilized world do to fight this disease? When Jews suffered because of hate speech, we invented the anti-Semitism law to protect them. I propose widening this umbrella to include the rest of us. The UN and other concerned international organizations, governmental and nongovernmental, must start collaboration to come up with such rules.
Otherwise, the current clash of civilizations will continue at a larger and more dangerous level and rate.
Humiliated people of a certain religion, race or culture may take it only for a while. The world’s most devastating war, World War II, was a direct result of humiliation the German race suffered at the hands of victorious World War 1 powers. Humiliating over a billion Muslims can’t go on for long without a hit back. Extremists, terrorist organizations and hate preachers are already working on it. Can we afford to wait until the damage is irreversible? We waited too long before and did too little. We should wake up earlier and do better ... this time.
“Freedom of expression is important, but so is respect for other people.” This was the opinion of Danish Vice Prime Minister Bendt Bendtsen in an interview with daily Jyllands-Posten about the paper’s action in publishing 12 demeaning caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) that has pitted Denmark against the Muslim world.
“Freedom of speech is an important right, but it also carried with it an obligation to use good judgment,” he contended. “What Jyllands-Posten did is totally legal. I’ve got nothing against freedom of speech — it is important for us all — but if it can offend and hurt a lot of people, why use freedom of speech for that? This is about respecting other people’s cultures.”
Bendtsen reminded: “It was not unheard of for Danes to get upset over misused religious symbols: Two summers ago, a grocery store was forced to stop selling flip-flops with pictures of Jesus after religious groups complained.”
“Danish newspapers could possibly learn something from US newspapers, which tended not to try to push the limits of what was permissible,” he advised. “In the US, freedom of expression is also important. At the same time, there is also a tradition of showing consideration for others.”
I don’t think I can put it any better. It is amazing, though, that he needed to state the obvious.
The editors of the Norwegian, Danish, French and Jordanian newspapers that published the caricatures have something in common. They run small-time newspapers, and were probably trying to make waves, build up reputation and boost sales. This might sound cynical, but it is much better than the alternative explanation — religious hatred. One can’t call what these papers did an exercise of “maximum free speech”, as the Danish paper’s editor put it. If so, why not start with your own? Muslims believe in and respect all of Allah’s prophets and messengers and would not tolerate disgracing any of them.
If practicing “maximum free speech” was the real motive, then there are other ways to flex your muscles. Try, for example, casting a single shade of doubt on the “official” number of the Holocaust victims. People get imprisoned, fired and their character assassinated for discussing the issue.
Denmark and Norway are among the few European nations that have clean history with the Muslim “Ummah.” They didn’t join in the Crusades. They never colonized Muslim lands. They didn’t help in the creation and support of Israel. They took no part in the so-called “war on terror” against Arab and Muslim nations. Therefore, they have never been on any black list of the terrorists, the anti-Western, or anti-globalization activists.
With such a clean record, spotless history and profitable business relations with over 1,200 million Muslims, you expect Danish leaders to be wiser.
Why would the queen, prime minister and conservative Christian groups go out of their way to squander all these fortunes?
Why would they, out of the blue, insist on inflaming Muslim passions with mindless, hurtful, hateful statements and caricatures?
What is the cultural, intellectual value of depicting the holiest symbol of a fifth of the world’s population as a suicidal bomber, womanizer and terrorist ?
Hate speech got the world into its worst conflicts and wars, most on ideological grounds — Christian Crusades, European holy wars, Muslim sectarian civil wars, World War I and II, down to recent conflicts in Ireland, Bosnia, Chechnya, Lebanon, Rwanda, Kosovo and neocon “crusade” on terror. Hate speech killed millions of Native Americans, blacks, Armenians, Jews, Bosnians, Indian untouchables, Chinese and Cambodian intellectuals, Chechens, Gypsies, and Kosovars. All started with some hateful doctrine based on race or ideological superiority, such as Nazism, Zionism, white supremacy and Mao’s Cultural Revolution. By dehumanizing and demonizing the other, it makes you feel superior and helps you rally your own behind a cause. It also justifies your acts of aggression, suppression and injustice.
So, what could and should the civilized world do to fight this disease? When Jews suffered because of hate speech, we invented the anti-Semitism law to protect them. I propose widening this umbrella to include the rest of us. The UN and other concerned international organizations, governmental and nongovernmental, must start collaboration to come up with such rules.
Otherwise, the current clash of civilizations will continue at a larger and more dangerous level and rate.
Humiliated people of a certain religion, race or culture may take it only for a while. The world’s most devastating war, World War II, was a direct result of humiliation the German race suffered at the hands of victorious World War 1 powers. Humiliating over a billion Muslims can’t go on for long without a hit back. Extremists, terrorist organizations and hate preachers are already working on it. Can we afford to wait until the damage is irreversible? We waited too long before and did too little. We should wake up earlier and do better ... this time.
Monday, January 30, 2006
The Luxury Tax of Dubai Experience
Dr. Khaled Batarfi
“Yes, we have enough money to keep us happy for many generations, but we decided to make our country prosperity-maker for the world, starting with our immediate neighbors. Besides, after the business plane takes off, stopping or slowing midair is not an option.” This was the answer of a senior Emirati official I met during my recent visit to his booming, blossoming country.
True, Abu Dhabi, Dubai and Sharjah are becoming profitable arenas for global heavyweight investors. They boast some of the world’s highest buildings, biggest shopping malls, artificial islands, best airlines and airports, among many other signs of affluence. The investment in the future is even greater.
I do appreciate the mentality of openness, transparency and optimism. The Emiratis make you feel that nothing is impossible to achieve if you have the will, the courage and the right attitude.
Still, I couldn’t help ask my candid host about the price they had to pay, the side effects and if it was really worth it?
Some 95 percent of Dubai’s population is expatriates. At the current rate, in ten years, the native population may go down to less than one percent. Most expatriates are from one racial background. Few locals have a stake in the huge development their country is making. You can hardly find them in the street, offices and boardrooms. In fact, you can go around Dubai for days and see no Emirati and speak no Arabic.
I relayed this to my host, and he was like waiting for the question. “You don’t see a problem with that?” I asked.
“Not really!” he said. “Yes, I would hate to miss my language in the street, but ... there is a price for luxury!”
What a price, I thought; then pressed on: More than just losing your language, you may actually lose your culture and identity. Your kids will grow in an alien world, where they become a tiny minority in their own country. They won’t need their language to communicate, because almost no one else uses it. They would look hard for an Arabic school to attend.
There is also the security dimension. How can you control a majority of a certain race if things went the Parisian way? In France, the rioters represented a small minority, but still it took a big power a long while to calm things down. How are you going to deal with a similar disturbance if your majority demanded more rights in what they may regard as their homeland?
To be fair, this is not just an Emirati phenomenon. The Bahraini labor minister submitted a study to the recent Gulf Cooperation Council summit about the worsening situation in the whole region. He warned that, soon enough, millions of expatriates will be eligible to full citizenship. Most are non-Muslim or non-Arab. Since all Gulf countries are now members of WTO, they can’t keep denying such rights to long-term residents. He suggested that for nonessential labor there should be a stay limit of six years.
The Emirati official was not alarmed. “Our expatriates”, he contended, “won’t rebel because they are happy. Losing cultural identity in today’s global village is normal. Dubai and other Emirate cities are now top global hub for business, media and entertainment. We do try to give a local flavor and touch to our cities, services and offerings. Look at this hotel, for example. It has Arabic and Islamic architectural look and feel, but was built by foreigners. What difference does it make? There is a price to be paid for luxury.”
But why do you have to get all your labors from one region? Since you do have a choice, why haven’t you diversified? I asked.
He was frank.
“Labor from the region we depend on is cheaper and more skilled. They expect less and give more. Security-wise, we have had the best experience, yet, with them than with other nationalities. Our economic boom is private sector made. If businesses prefer certain nationality and we don’t have a problem with that for the above reasons, then ... why not?”
The next few days in Dubai, I talked to people of different nationalities. He was right. Most were economically happy or OK. But politically, they were not. Many long-time residents demanded equal treatment. “Why Emiratis pay only a third of the outrageously expensive electric bills and we pay in full”, an Egyptian executive protested. “This means we subsidize the locals. It is not fair.”
An Emirati airport staff felt insecure. “I can’t argue even with a taxi driver, because his street population might gang up with him against lonely me! It is scary!”
I still think the Dubai experience is enriching, educating and enlightening. There are so many useful lessons we could learn from. But one of the most important is: There should be a limit to what price you pay for luxury!
“Yes, we have enough money to keep us happy for many generations, but we decided to make our country prosperity-maker for the world, starting with our immediate neighbors. Besides, after the business plane takes off, stopping or slowing midair is not an option.” This was the answer of a senior Emirati official I met during my recent visit to his booming, blossoming country.
True, Abu Dhabi, Dubai and Sharjah are becoming profitable arenas for global heavyweight investors. They boast some of the world’s highest buildings, biggest shopping malls, artificial islands, best airlines and airports, among many other signs of affluence. The investment in the future is even greater.
I do appreciate the mentality of openness, transparency and optimism. The Emiratis make you feel that nothing is impossible to achieve if you have the will, the courage and the right attitude.
Still, I couldn’t help ask my candid host about the price they had to pay, the side effects and if it was really worth it?
Some 95 percent of Dubai’s population is expatriates. At the current rate, in ten years, the native population may go down to less than one percent. Most expatriates are from one racial background. Few locals have a stake in the huge development their country is making. You can hardly find them in the street, offices and boardrooms. In fact, you can go around Dubai for days and see no Emirati and speak no Arabic.
I relayed this to my host, and he was like waiting for the question. “You don’t see a problem with that?” I asked.
“Not really!” he said. “Yes, I would hate to miss my language in the street, but ... there is a price for luxury!”
What a price, I thought; then pressed on: More than just losing your language, you may actually lose your culture and identity. Your kids will grow in an alien world, where they become a tiny minority in their own country. They won’t need their language to communicate, because almost no one else uses it. They would look hard for an Arabic school to attend.
There is also the security dimension. How can you control a majority of a certain race if things went the Parisian way? In France, the rioters represented a small minority, but still it took a big power a long while to calm things down. How are you going to deal with a similar disturbance if your majority demanded more rights in what they may regard as their homeland?
To be fair, this is not just an Emirati phenomenon. The Bahraini labor minister submitted a study to the recent Gulf Cooperation Council summit about the worsening situation in the whole region. He warned that, soon enough, millions of expatriates will be eligible to full citizenship. Most are non-Muslim or non-Arab. Since all Gulf countries are now members of WTO, they can’t keep denying such rights to long-term residents. He suggested that for nonessential labor there should be a stay limit of six years.
The Emirati official was not alarmed. “Our expatriates”, he contended, “won’t rebel because they are happy. Losing cultural identity in today’s global village is normal. Dubai and other Emirate cities are now top global hub for business, media and entertainment. We do try to give a local flavor and touch to our cities, services and offerings. Look at this hotel, for example. It has Arabic and Islamic architectural look and feel, but was built by foreigners. What difference does it make? There is a price to be paid for luxury.”
But why do you have to get all your labors from one region? Since you do have a choice, why haven’t you diversified? I asked.
He was frank.
“Labor from the region we depend on is cheaper and more skilled. They expect less and give more. Security-wise, we have had the best experience, yet, with them than with other nationalities. Our economic boom is private sector made. If businesses prefer certain nationality and we don’t have a problem with that for the above reasons, then ... why not?”
The next few days in Dubai, I talked to people of different nationalities. He was right. Most were economically happy or OK. But politically, they were not. Many long-time residents demanded equal treatment. “Why Emiratis pay only a third of the outrageously expensive electric bills and we pay in full”, an Egyptian executive protested. “This means we subsidize the locals. It is not fair.”
An Emirati airport staff felt insecure. “I can’t argue even with a taxi driver, because his street population might gang up with him against lonely me! It is scary!”
I still think the Dubai experience is enriching, educating and enlightening. There are so many useful lessons we could learn from. But one of the most important is: There should be a limit to what price you pay for luxury!
Sunday, January 15, 2006
Haj: Some Lessons for the World
Dr. Khaled Batarfi,
Haj was an educating and ennobling experience. Like my last three holy journeys, I learned a lot about myself, ourselves and the world we live in. Here are some of the lessons.
Haj is an occasion where people of all colors, races and backgrounds live together, move as one, and do the same thing, the same way, at the same time. You can’t feel superior to others if you have to be an integral part of their thoughts, feelings and actions. It doesn’t matter here if you are from a better economic or social class, or have higher position or education. It doesn’t make a difference if you are culturally more sophisticated, elegant or better looking. Under the sunny sky of Makkah, in the squeezed crowd of millions, in the simple two-piece white dress everyone looks the same.
In the holy places you forget who you are and where you came from, at least in your relations with the others.
I saw men and women perform the same rituals at the same space and time. Women did not have to cover their faces. In fact, they were required not to.
No religious police, rules or regulations prevent them from doing what they had to do in the same place as men and with men. No one tells them to stay behind to take care of home and children. No one dares say they are lesser creatures than men, and should not be part of men’s tougher and superior world. In Haj, men and women are as equal as children of Allah can be.
If we could go back to our lives with such sense! If we were to give our women what Islam gave them! If we decided to stop mixing our Dark Age tribal traditions with the pure Islam of Khadeeja, Aisha and the great women at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his caliphs!
There was no political or social enmity during the Haj. I saw Indians, Pakistanis and Kashmiris share the same tents and mosques. They helped each other and cared for one another. Iraqis and Kuwaitis, Sudanese of all tribes and races, Syrians and Lebanese, Moroccans and Algerians and many others who came from warring places were united under the blessings of one merciful God. If only the leaders of these nations would learn a lesson from this! If they could unite their peoples as they were united in Makkah under the banner of peaceful, encompassing and tolerating Islam!
Religious rivalry was absent, too. Muslims of all sects were praying to the same God, toward the same direction, behind the same imam. They were identical in their appearance, performance and feelings. Sunnis and Shiites, Salafis and Sufis, conservatives and liberals ate together, walked together, and prayed together. They didn’t ask, they didn’t tell, and they didn’t argue about the history of differences that occurred some thousand and four hundred years ago. If we could take that home with us, stop digging the past, and start planning for the future!
And there was no politics. We all prayed for a united and liberated Muslim nation. We prayed for the freedom of occupied Palestinians, Iraqis, Chechens, Kashmiris and Afghanis. But there was no hatred of the non-Muslims. There were no calls for jihad against the peaceful nations and peoples of the non-Muslim world. For almost a week, we were busy praying for the betterment of our families and societies, and cared less for the confusing and dividing politics of governments and leaders. If we could continue to do so after Haj! If we could focus more on the improvement of ourselves rather than on the destruction of our perceived enemies and rivals!
In Makkah we all learned that the world is so small, life is so short, and death can be so close. I faced death with many others more than once. Most of us survived. If we could appreciate that and always remember that only love can make our lives worth living!
In the holy sites, we learned to resolve our differences peacefully. We had to share tight spaces, meager resources, and tough environment. Many pushed their way through tight crowds; others lost their temper standing in long lines for food or water. But every time we reminded ourselves that Allah won’t accept our Haj if we don’t make peace with each other.
Problems were quickly solved and compromises made with apologetic, friendly smiles. If we could always remember that most things are not worth fighting for! And that with more humility, less intransigence, and some compromises we could all live a better, happier and peaceful life!
If we all, Muslims and non-Muslims, could learn what we, the pilgrims did, our world will definitely be a much better and happier place!
Haj was an educating and ennobling experience. Like my last three holy journeys, I learned a lot about myself, ourselves and the world we live in. Here are some of the lessons.
Haj is an occasion where people of all colors, races and backgrounds live together, move as one, and do the same thing, the same way, at the same time. You can’t feel superior to others if you have to be an integral part of their thoughts, feelings and actions. It doesn’t matter here if you are from a better economic or social class, or have higher position or education. It doesn’t make a difference if you are culturally more sophisticated, elegant or better looking. Under the sunny sky of Makkah, in the squeezed crowd of millions, in the simple two-piece white dress everyone looks the same.
In the holy places you forget who you are and where you came from, at least in your relations with the others.
I saw men and women perform the same rituals at the same space and time. Women did not have to cover their faces. In fact, they were required not to.
No religious police, rules or regulations prevent them from doing what they had to do in the same place as men and with men. No one tells them to stay behind to take care of home and children. No one dares say they are lesser creatures than men, and should not be part of men’s tougher and superior world. In Haj, men and women are as equal as children of Allah can be.
If we could go back to our lives with such sense! If we were to give our women what Islam gave them! If we decided to stop mixing our Dark Age tribal traditions with the pure Islam of Khadeeja, Aisha and the great women at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his caliphs!
There was no political or social enmity during the Haj. I saw Indians, Pakistanis and Kashmiris share the same tents and mosques. They helped each other and cared for one another. Iraqis and Kuwaitis, Sudanese of all tribes and races, Syrians and Lebanese, Moroccans and Algerians and many others who came from warring places were united under the blessings of one merciful God. If only the leaders of these nations would learn a lesson from this! If they could unite their peoples as they were united in Makkah under the banner of peaceful, encompassing and tolerating Islam!
Religious rivalry was absent, too. Muslims of all sects were praying to the same God, toward the same direction, behind the same imam. They were identical in their appearance, performance and feelings. Sunnis and Shiites, Salafis and Sufis, conservatives and liberals ate together, walked together, and prayed together. They didn’t ask, they didn’t tell, and they didn’t argue about the history of differences that occurred some thousand and four hundred years ago. If we could take that home with us, stop digging the past, and start planning for the future!
And there was no politics. We all prayed for a united and liberated Muslim nation. We prayed for the freedom of occupied Palestinians, Iraqis, Chechens, Kashmiris and Afghanis. But there was no hatred of the non-Muslims. There were no calls for jihad against the peaceful nations and peoples of the non-Muslim world. For almost a week, we were busy praying for the betterment of our families and societies, and cared less for the confusing and dividing politics of governments and leaders. If we could continue to do so after Haj! If we could focus more on the improvement of ourselves rather than on the destruction of our perceived enemies and rivals!
In Makkah we all learned that the world is so small, life is so short, and death can be so close. I faced death with many others more than once. Most of us survived. If we could appreciate that and always remember that only love can make our lives worth living!
In the holy sites, we learned to resolve our differences peacefully. We had to share tight spaces, meager resources, and tough environment. Many pushed their way through tight crowds; others lost their temper standing in long lines for food or water. But every time we reminded ourselves that Allah won’t accept our Haj if we don’t make peace with each other.
Problems were quickly solved and compromises made with apologetic, friendly smiles. If we could always remember that most things are not worth fighting for! And that with more humility, less intransigence, and some compromises we could all live a better, happier and peaceful life!
If we all, Muslims and non-Muslims, could learn what we, the pilgrims did, our world will definitely be a much better and happier place!
Haj: Some Lessons for the World
Dr. Khaled Batarfi,
Haj was an educating and ennobling experience. Like my last three holy journeys, I learned a lot about myself, ourselves and the world we live in. Here are some of the lessons.
Haj is an occasion where people of all colors, races and backgrounds live together, move as one, and do the same thing, the same way, at the same time. You can’t feel superior to others if you have to be an integral part of their thoughts, feelings and actions. It doesn’t matter here if you are from a better economic or social class, or have higher position or education. It doesn’t make a difference if you are culturally more sophisticated, elegant or better looking. Under the sunny sky of Makkah, in the squeezed crowd of millions, in the simple two-piece white dress everyone looks the same.
In the holy places you forget who you are and where you came from, at least in your relations with the others.
I saw men and women perform the same rituals at the same space and time. Women did not have to cover their faces. In fact, they were required not to.
No religious police, rules or regulations prevent them from doing what they had to do in the same place as men and with men. No one tells them to stay behind to take care of home and children. No one dares say they are lesser creatures than men, and should not be part of men’s tougher and superior world. In Haj, men and women are as equal as children of Allah can be.
If we could go back to our lives with such sense! If we were to give our women what Islam gave them! If we decided to stop mixing our Dark Age tribal traditions with the pure Islam of Khadeeja, Aisha and the great women at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his caliphs!
There was no political or social enmity during the Haj. I saw Indians, Pakistanis and Kashmiris share the same tents and mosques. They helped each other and cared for one another. Iraqis and Kuwaitis, Sudanese of all tribes and races, Syrians and Lebanese, Moroccans and Algerians and many others who came from warring places were united under the blessings of one merciful God. If only the leaders of these nations would learn a lesson from this! If they could unite their peoples as they were united in Makkah under the banner of peaceful, encompassing and tolerating Islam!
Religious rivalry was absent, too. Muslims of all sects were praying to the same God, toward the same direction, behind the same imam. They were identical in their appearance, performance and feelings. Sunnis and Shiites, Salafis and Sufis, conservatives and liberals ate together, walked together, and prayed together. They didn’t ask, they didn’t tell, and they didn’t argue about the history of differences that occurred some thousand and four hundred years ago. If we could take that home with us, stop digging the past, and start planning for the future!
And there was no politics. We all prayed for a united and liberated Muslim nation. We prayed for the freedom of occupied Palestinians, Iraqis, Chechens, Kashmiris and Afghanis. But there was no hatred of the non-Muslims. There were no calls for jihad against the peaceful nations and peoples of the non-Muslim world. For almost a week, we were busy praying for the betterment of our families and societies, and cared less for the confusing and dividing politics of governments and leaders. If we could continue to do so after Haj! If we could focus more on the improvement of ourselves rather than on the destruction of our perceived enemies and rivals!
In Makkah we all learned that the world is so small, life is so short, and death can be so close. I faced death with many others more than once. Most of us survived. If we could appreciate that and always remember that only love can make our lives worth living!
In the holy sites, we learned to resolve our differences peacefully. We had to share tight spaces, meager resources, and tough environment. Many pushed their way through tight crowds; others lost their temper standing in long lines for food or water. But every time we reminded ourselves that Allah won’t accept our Haj if we don’t make peace with each other.
Problems were quickly solved and compromises made with apologetic, friendly smiles. If we could always remember that most things are not worth fighting for! And that with more humility, less intransigence, and some compromises we could all live a better, happier and peaceful life!
If we all, Muslims and non-Muslims, could learn what we, the pilgrims did, our world will definitely be a much better and happier place!
Haj was an educating and ennobling experience. Like my last three holy journeys, I learned a lot about myself, ourselves and the world we live in. Here are some of the lessons.
Haj is an occasion where people of all colors, races and backgrounds live together, move as one, and do the same thing, the same way, at the same time. You can’t feel superior to others if you have to be an integral part of their thoughts, feelings and actions. It doesn’t matter here if you are from a better economic or social class, or have higher position or education. It doesn’t make a difference if you are culturally more sophisticated, elegant or better looking. Under the sunny sky of Makkah, in the squeezed crowd of millions, in the simple two-piece white dress everyone looks the same.
In the holy places you forget who you are and where you came from, at least in your relations with the others.
I saw men and women perform the same rituals at the same space and time. Women did not have to cover their faces. In fact, they were required not to.
No religious police, rules or regulations prevent them from doing what they had to do in the same place as men and with men. No one tells them to stay behind to take care of home and children. No one dares say they are lesser creatures than men, and should not be part of men’s tougher and superior world. In Haj, men and women are as equal as children of Allah can be.
If we could go back to our lives with such sense! If we were to give our women what Islam gave them! If we decided to stop mixing our Dark Age tribal traditions with the pure Islam of Khadeeja, Aisha and the great women at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his caliphs!
There was no political or social enmity during the Haj. I saw Indians, Pakistanis and Kashmiris share the same tents and mosques. They helped each other and cared for one another. Iraqis and Kuwaitis, Sudanese of all tribes and races, Syrians and Lebanese, Moroccans and Algerians and many others who came from warring places were united under the blessings of one merciful God. If only the leaders of these nations would learn a lesson from this! If they could unite their peoples as they were united in Makkah under the banner of peaceful, encompassing and tolerating Islam!
Religious rivalry was absent, too. Muslims of all sects were praying to the same God, toward the same direction, behind the same imam. They were identical in their appearance, performance and feelings. Sunnis and Shiites, Salafis and Sufis, conservatives and liberals ate together, walked together, and prayed together. They didn’t ask, they didn’t tell, and they didn’t argue about the history of differences that occurred some thousand and four hundred years ago. If we could take that home with us, stop digging the past, and start planning for the future!
And there was no politics. We all prayed for a united and liberated Muslim nation. We prayed for the freedom of occupied Palestinians, Iraqis, Chechens, Kashmiris and Afghanis. But there was no hatred of the non-Muslims. There were no calls for jihad against the peaceful nations and peoples of the non-Muslim world. For almost a week, we were busy praying for the betterment of our families and societies, and cared less for the confusing and dividing politics of governments and leaders. If we could continue to do so after Haj! If we could focus more on the improvement of ourselves rather than on the destruction of our perceived enemies and rivals!
In Makkah we all learned that the world is so small, life is so short, and death can be so close. I faced death with many others more than once. Most of us survived. If we could appreciate that and always remember that only love can make our lives worth living!
In the holy sites, we learned to resolve our differences peacefully. We had to share tight spaces, meager resources, and tough environment. Many pushed their way through tight crowds; others lost their temper standing in long lines for food or water. But every time we reminded ourselves that Allah won’t accept our Haj if we don’t make peace with each other.
Problems were quickly solved and compromises made with apologetic, friendly smiles. If we could always remember that most things are not worth fighting for! And that with more humility, less intransigence, and some compromises we could all live a better, happier and peaceful life!
If we all, Muslims and non-Muslims, could learn what we, the pilgrims did, our world will definitely be a much better and happier place!
Thursday, January 05, 2006
Your Take on Arab Hypocrisy
Dr. Khaled M. Batarfi
"So that is all the Arab hypocrisy you cared to mention?" Many readers asked or seemed to ask.
Some reminded me of the way we talk and act on women issues. When Rajaa Alsanae, a Saudi dentist, wrote her first novel about the love lives of four Saudi girls, many exploded. They called the book "Sex and the City." While many similarities exists with the famous HBO's TV series, there was no explicit sex in the book, only the adventures, dreams and disappointments of four Saudi girls in their relations with the other sex.
The book is a true description of how many segments of society still treat women as a piece of property to be sold to the highest bidder. One girl was refused by the groom's mother because she was half American from a lesser family. The other lost her chance because she was divorced. The third had to play the game of aloofness with the man she loved, learning a lesson from a friend who was divorced because she showed her eagerness to have sex with her husband before she moved in with him. Naturally for many paranoid Saudi men, he suspected that she was experienced in the art of love, and he wasn't the first in her life. The fourth character was very traditional, but lost her husband to a Japanese girlfriend.
Love is the last thing considered in lots of traditional marriage arrangements. Many young hearts are crushed in the process without mercy, empathy or mere understanding.
Some of us, men and women, live in denial. They felt the book gave false impressions about our virtuous society. But few could deny the existence of these and many other similar tragedies. The best way to solve a problem is to admit it. You can't cure an illness if you don't know or refuse to know.
Hypocrisy rules when it comes to our women rights. We do make flowery talk: She is the beloved mother, sister, daughter and wife; the preserved and protected pearl and jewel. But most won't even utter their names in public, referring instead to "the family," or "dependents."
Because of such "dependency-property" attitude, our women need to get males' permission for education, work, bank accounts, travel, and even medical attention. Imagine that: a new guideline for girls schools stated that in case of emergency, the school cannot send students to hospitals without male guardian permission. Another rule stipulates that doctors, even in extreme emergencies, need to wait for such permission.
Foreigners and religious minorities also suffer from our hypocrisy. We talk about Islamic and Arab hospitality, principles and rights. We claim that we treat our foreign guests well and give them their due rights. The truth is too many suffer from physical, psychological and financial maltreatment.
The same goes for religious minorities, whether they are Muslims of other sects or non Muslims. They deserve more religious rights, starting with passion and respect.
Other respondents highlighted additional aspects of our hypocrisy, as they see them. Dr. Joseph Lerner wrote: "The religious differences within Islam are overwhelming. Then, there are the tribal-like aspects of the Arab world which impact the functional integrity of the existing states.
Consider the Arab response to Palestinian refugees. The Arab League has directed Arab countries not to grant citizenship to them. Some Arab countries refuse to accept them as refugees and those which do, limit their employment opportunities. Their living facilities are generally below national standards. Arab countries limit their financial assistance claiming the problem was caused by non-Arabs."
Muhammad Yusuf declared: "We Western Muslim’s can really understand that Arabs are cursed with hypocrisy. We followed the Islamic countries summit in Makkah and the Saudi National Dialogue where participants speak about a united Muslim Ummah, but it is all talk with no action. We see Arabs claiming that western Governments are trying to destroy Islam. It is not Western governments that destroy us, but Arab hypocrisy, backbiting, lying, etc, etc..
Saudi King Abdullah was right when he said in Makkah summit "Allah will never change to the better the situation of any people unless they first change themselves, as Allah promised in the Quran."
Chris Chrisman contended that "the first step in making change happen is to recognize the need for change. I am reading more and more articles by Arab journalists and intellectuals saying that their world cannot continue on the same course it has been maintaining. This is very hopeful. Have a great New Year.
Ralph Sorbris advise that the best way to improve Arab situation is to unite: "For the new Gregorian year of 2006, I wish you all the best and I look forward to see the formation of a common vision for the Middle East. A strong united Middle East would enrich the world."
"So that is all the Arab hypocrisy you cared to mention?" Many readers asked or seemed to ask.
Some reminded me of the way we talk and act on women issues. When Rajaa Alsanae, a Saudi dentist, wrote her first novel about the love lives of four Saudi girls, many exploded. They called the book "Sex and the City." While many similarities exists with the famous HBO's TV series, there was no explicit sex in the book, only the adventures, dreams and disappointments of four Saudi girls in their relations with the other sex.
The book is a true description of how many segments of society still treat women as a piece of property to be sold to the highest bidder. One girl was refused by the groom's mother because she was half American from a lesser family. The other lost her chance because she was divorced. The third had to play the game of aloofness with the man she loved, learning a lesson from a friend who was divorced because she showed her eagerness to have sex with her husband before she moved in with him. Naturally for many paranoid Saudi men, he suspected that she was experienced in the art of love, and he wasn't the first in her life. The fourth character was very traditional, but lost her husband to a Japanese girlfriend.
Love is the last thing considered in lots of traditional marriage arrangements. Many young hearts are crushed in the process without mercy, empathy or mere understanding.
Some of us, men and women, live in denial. They felt the book gave false impressions about our virtuous society. But few could deny the existence of these and many other similar tragedies. The best way to solve a problem is to admit it. You can't cure an illness if you don't know or refuse to know.
Hypocrisy rules when it comes to our women rights. We do make flowery talk: She is the beloved mother, sister, daughter and wife; the preserved and protected pearl and jewel. But most won't even utter their names in public, referring instead to "the family," or "dependents."
Because of such "dependency-property" attitude, our women need to get males' permission for education, work, bank accounts, travel, and even medical attention. Imagine that: a new guideline for girls schools stated that in case of emergency, the school cannot send students to hospitals without male guardian permission. Another rule stipulates that doctors, even in extreme emergencies, need to wait for such permission.
Foreigners and religious minorities also suffer from our hypocrisy. We talk about Islamic and Arab hospitality, principles and rights. We claim that we treat our foreign guests well and give them their due rights. The truth is too many suffer from physical, psychological and financial maltreatment.
The same goes for religious minorities, whether they are Muslims of other sects or non Muslims. They deserve more religious rights, starting with passion and respect.
Other respondents highlighted additional aspects of our hypocrisy, as they see them. Dr. Joseph Lerner wrote: "The religious differences within Islam are overwhelming. Then, there are the tribal-like aspects of the Arab world which impact the functional integrity of the existing states.
Consider the Arab response to Palestinian refugees. The Arab League has directed Arab countries not to grant citizenship to them. Some Arab countries refuse to accept them as refugees and those which do, limit their employment opportunities. Their living facilities are generally below national standards. Arab countries limit their financial assistance claiming the problem was caused by non-Arabs."
Muhammad Yusuf declared: "We Western Muslim’s can really understand that Arabs are cursed with hypocrisy. We followed the Islamic countries summit in Makkah and the Saudi National Dialogue where participants speak about a united Muslim Ummah, but it is all talk with no action. We see Arabs claiming that western Governments are trying to destroy Islam. It is not Western governments that destroy us, but Arab hypocrisy, backbiting, lying, etc, etc..
Saudi King Abdullah was right when he said in Makkah summit "Allah will never change to the better the situation of any people unless they first change themselves, as Allah promised in the Quran."
Chris Chrisman contended that "the first step in making change happen is to recognize the need for change. I am reading more and more articles by Arab journalists and intellectuals saying that their world cannot continue on the same course it has been maintaining. This is very hopeful. Have a great New Year.
Ralph Sorbris advise that the best way to improve Arab situation is to unite: "For the new Gregorian year of 2006, I wish you all the best and I look forward to see the formation of a common vision for the Middle East. A strong united Middle East would enrich the world."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)