December 2011
Vol 11, No.12
THE MIDDLE PATH, OUR SHARED VALUE By Anas Zubedy
T
he path of moderation is, in and of itself, a shared value of all our major beliefs. The Buddha described the path of wisdom as ‘the middle path’ and taught about moderation in thought, speech, and conduct. Hinduism speaks of a middle path of salvation based on the principles of balance for holistic growth in body, mind and spirit. The Bible talks about temperate behavior between the things that are permissible and the things that are beneficial. Islam promotes ‘wasatiyyah’, the persuasion that the best of works are those done in moderation. Our faiths emphasize the middle path in personal growth and social harmony; in the holistic growth of mind, body and spirit, in our conduct and in our dealings with one another. “Avoiding both these extremes, the Perfect One has realized the Middle Path; it gives vision, gives knowledge, and leads to calm, to insight, to enlightenment…” - Buddha
The middle path must become a more and more pertinent platform today in a world which is rapidly globalizing.
degrees of different stands which people can take. But in a global setting where we can no longer overlook diversity, we have to allocate space for the negotiation of different values, needs and hopes from all sides. In today’s diverse society, unity in diversity is a pragmatic matter. “And [they are] those who, when they spend, do so not excessively or sparingly but are ever, between that, [justly] moderate” – Quran 25:67
The challenge of dealing with diversity will be most clearly felt in businesses, in education and in social administration, where policies affect a wide range of people. Any decision made must consider the diverse values and needs of those involved, especially in inter-cultural and inter-religious contexts. A partisan framework cannot serve a diverse environment well. Partisanship pushes people to choose sides and overlooks the many varying
As a multi-cultural, multi-religious and multi-lingual society which has managed to firmly progress as one nation, Malaysia is a good example of unity in diversity, of a nation that follows the path of moderation. This can be seen in the example of its 1957 Federal Constitution, which found a formula for people of different cultures, religions and languages to go to school, grow up, work and live
Turn to next page
ARTICLES . S HARP E MPLOYMENT D OWNTURN , S OCIAL UNREST.................................................................P 2
. C HINA C AN B REAK F REE
D OLLAR TRAP...................................................................P 4 OF THE
. D IVISIONS D EEPEN
UN T ALK ON CLIMATE...........................................................P 6
.DETERMINANTS
AT
QATAR’S FOREIGN POLICY PART I & II.....................................................P 7 OF
.BOMBS OVER CAMBODIA................................P 8 . A RRESTS
F OLLOW O CCUPY O AKLAND DEMONSTRATIONS.............................................P 5
. J ESUS
WAS A
P ALESTINIAN
AND
W HY
IT
MATTERS.........................................................P 10
2 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
continued from page 1
alongside each other while maintaining their own cultural uniqueness. The inhabitants of Malaya at that point were made up of the natives and a significant diaspora of Chinese and Indian ethnic groups. A more partisan stance could have either refused citizenship to the non-natives, or taken an approach of assimilation - absorbing the race, religion and language of the minorities into an all-enveloping majority. But the negotiations between the different parties involved - the Malays and nonMalays, the Rulers and the people, the Malayans and the British - were guided by a middle path principle which assumed that all communities should have their rights and responsibilities. ”I have the right to do anything,” you say—but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”—but not everything is constructive. No one should seek their own good, but the good of others.”- 1 Corinthians 10:23-24 To allow for this unity in diversity, they looked for the right balance between the needs, hopes and fears of the Malay and indigenous majority and the nonMalay - the Chinese and Indian minorities. There must have been significant pressure – for the Malay majority, the pressure could have been to take a more extreme stance in order to have full economic and political power; for the Chinese and the Indians, the pressure could have been to put the needs of their own communities
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
first even if it meant denying the rights of others. But what is most striking about the 1957 Malaysian Constitution is that great care had been taken to ensure that all parties could get what they wanted only in the measure that it could balance out with what other parties wanted. In other words, all had to give up something, so that all could have a part in everything. On the economic front, Malaysia’s policies also favored the middle path. To solve the problem of economic disparity between ethnic groups, with the majority Malay being in the lowest rungs, it did not take more extreme measures of nationalizing wealth or taking the wealth of one community to resolve the poverty of another. Instead, it took a moderate path by combining two elements: (1) the implementation of affirmative action and the redistribution of wealth; (2) the shared value of working hard to increase the nation’s per capita income. The goal was to expand the economic pie so that poverty could be alleviated without taking away the wealth of the others. While its implementation may not have been the most ideal, once again it was workable and has proven effective. Absolute poverty in Malaysia has been reduced from about 50 – 60% to about 3% today. It has played a big part in bringing significant development to the general population as a whole without major divisive conflicts.
L E A D A R T I C L E be perfect, I see them as good examples of middle path solutions which also seem to indicate a notable point – the middle path works. Malaysia as an entity of different cultures, religions and languages is a microcosm of our global setting which is becoming increasingly cross-cultural. Its experiences in finding solutions for a diverse society can be a model of intercultural negotiations and unity in diversity. “But Yoga becomes the discipline for the destruction of sorrow for him who is moderate in eating and recreation, moderate in work and sleep and walking.” – Bhagavad Gita The key is that the middle path is itself a shared value of most major traditions in the world. It provides a common ground for diverse peoples to meet and negotiate shared values and differences. It presents a common point of departure, guided by the same moderate and temperate behavior that is called for in most cultural value systems, thereby allowing for nonexclusive and non-divisive solutions. It offers solutions that can avoid intercultural conflict. As a shared principle and value, it is our answer to unity in diversity. 29 September, 2011
Anas Zubedy is Secretary-General of the International Movement for a Just World
While the policies I’ve cited may not
(JUST). He is also an entrepreneur.
SHARP EMPLOYMENT DOWNTURN, SOCIAL UNREST By Joseph Kishore The International Labour Organization, an agency of the United Nations, released a report Monday pointing to a disastrous global jobs situation and a “vicious cycle” sending the world economy into a new downturn. “The next few months will be crucial for avoiding a dramatic downturn in
employment and a further significant aggravation of social unrest,” warns the opening editorial to the World of Work report, released ahead of a G20 meeting later this week. In addition to documenting the employment situation, affecting both advanced and “developing” countries,
the report presents a damning portrait of contemporary world capitalism: growing financialization, declining taxes on the wealthy and corporations, and a collapse in the share of income going to the working class. Three years after the crash of 2008, “economic growth in major advanced continued next page
3 I N T E R N AT I O N A L M O V E M E N T
continued from page 2 economies has come to a halt and some countries have re-entered recession, notably in Europe,” the ILO notes. “Growth has also slowed down in large emerging and developing countries.” The vast majority of countries categorized as having advanced economies—mainly in the United States and Europe—have seen a slowdown in employment growth in the most recent quarter, and more than half have seen employment declines. At the same time, about half of those countries categorized as “emerging or developing” have seen declines in employment, including Russia and Mexico.
The advanced economies have 13 million fewer jobs today than in 2007, with the United States (6.7 million) and Spain (2.3 million) accounting for more than half of this figure. Due to the growth in the labor force, to restore pre-crisis employment rates, 27 million jobs would have to be added in advanced countries, and 80 million globally, over the next two years. The jobs situation is particularly bleak for young people, and this holds true in almost all parts of the world. “Among countries with recently available data, more than one in five youth [aged 1524], i.e. 20 percent, were unemployed as of the first quarter of 2011—against total unemployment of 9.6 percent.” According to the ILO’s projections, which assume no further slowdown in global growth, the employment rate in advanced countries is not expected to return to pre-crisis levels until far past 2016.
FOR A JUST WORLD
The prospects of a recovery in employment and economic growth are undermined by a number of factors, including a renewed financial crisis in Europe and a turn by governments throughout the world to fiscal austerity. Sharply declining wages for workers, particularly in advanced countries, are leading to a fall-off in consumption. “In short,” the ILO writes, “there is a vicious cycle of a weaker economy affecting jobs and society, in turn depressing real investment and consumption, thus the economy and so on.” Any prospect of a return to growth is also undermined by increasingly bitter national conflicts between the different capitalist powers. “While in 2008-2009 there was an attempt to coordinate policies, especially among G20 countries, there is evidence that countries are now acting in isolation,” the report states. The ILO expresses the hope that governments will institute job-creation programs to resolve the crisis. However, the impossibility of this happening is highlighted by the fact that the report cites the United States as the only major advanced country to advance a “national jobs plan.” In fact, the Obama administration’s proposal, even if enacted in full, would be no more than a drop in the bucket. Since it was announced in September, it has already been scaled down significantly. Whatever is passed will consist largely of tax cuts for corporations. The economic crisis is, predictably, producing a sharp increase in social discontent. The year 2011 has already seen a significant growth of the class struggle, beginning with the revolutionary upheavals in the Middle East and North Africa. They have since expanded to Europe, Latin America, and the United States, including in the Occupy Wall Street movement that began in September.
A R T I C L E S According to a metric of “social unrest” based on various indicators, including unemployment, the ILO calculates that 40 percent of the countries surveyed have seen a significant increase in the prospect of unrest. The likelihood of social unrest has increased particularly sharply in advanced countries. Moreover, the majority of countries worldwide reported a collapse of public confidence in national governments. Dissatisfaction over the availability of quality jobs is over 80 percent in subSaharan Africa and over 70 percent in Central and Eastern Europe. It is over 60 percent in the Middle East and North Africa, though significantly higher in some countries, including Egypt. Anger over the jobs situation is higher than 70 percent in Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain—countries that are currently at the center of the European-wide drive to slash social programs and eliminate all previous gains of the working class. THE FINANCIALIZATION OF WORLD ECONOMY
Global social conditions have deteriorated sharply since the Crash of 2008, precipitated by the collapse of a massive speculative bubble inflated over the previous decade. While the fall of global stock markets led to an immediate decline in the wealth of the financial aristocracy, the actions of governments, led by the United States, have served to quickly reverse this trend. In addition to documenting global labor conditions, the ILO report includes some important data on the financialization of the world economy, and the parallel process of wealth transfer—both before and after the 2008 crash. It notes, disapprovingly, that in the aftermath of the crash “countries have increasingly focused on appeasing financial markets” rather than restoring employment, and that this “has often centered on fiscal austerity and how to continued next page
4 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
continued from page 3 help the banks—without necessarily reforming the bank practices that led to the crisis, or providing a vision for how the real economy will recover.” In 2008, the capital share among financial corporations worldwide fell by more than 25 percent, after a decade of steady growth. Only a year later, however, shares were back to pre-crisis levels, a direct product of the various bank bailout schemes. “On the other hand,” the ILO noted, “the decline in the non-financial sector has been more gradual, but capital shares for this group—which account for 87 percent of employment in advanced countries— continue to decline.” This has produced what the report refers to as a “paradox”: “The impact of the global economic crisis of 2007-08 on the financial sector was short-lived initially—despite it being at the very origin of the downturn.” The growth of corporate profits since the crash have accrued largely to financial corporations.Non-financial corporations, moreover, instead of investing have funneled money into the stock market. “In 2009, more than 36 percent of profits were distributed in terms of dividends,
FOR
A
JUST
compared with less than 35 percent in 2007 and less than 29 percent in 2000…” This process of financialization is part of a longer-term trend, in which wealth accumulation through speculation has increasingly replaced productive investment. Far from reversing this trend, the economic crisis has only exacerbated it. At the same time, an ever smaller share of income has gone to the working class. According to the ILO, “the wage share— the share of domestic income that goes to labor—has declined in almost three quarters of the 69 countries for which data is available.” This is also a long-term trend. In addition to direct infusions of money into the banks, the transfer of wealth to the corporate and financial aristocracy has been facilitated by a tax policy that places an ever greater share of the tax burden on the working class. Between 2000 and 2008, 43 percent of countries decreased their top income tax rate, while 70 percent of countries decreased their corporate profit tax rate. During the same period, 30 percent of countries increased value added taxes or consumption taxes, which disproportionately target the working
CHINA CAN BREAK FREE
A R T I C L E S
WORLD
OF THE
class. Overall, the top personal income tax rate globally fell from 31.4 percent in 2003 to 29.1 percent in 2009. Corporate taxes have fallen from 29.5 percent to 25 percent in the same period. Again, this trend has only continued since the 2008 crisis. The proportion of government revenue from regressive consumption taxes has increased, while the income and corporate taxes have declined. The ILO’s policy recommendations, on the other hand, are both grossly insufficient and utterly incapable of realization within the framework of capitalism. In addition to a jobs program, it hopes that governments will cooperate to increase the share of income going to the workers, while placing greater constraints on the financial system. What the report in fact demonstrates, however, is that any attempt to resolve the crisis in the interests of the working class runs into direct conflict with the capitalist system and the financial aristocracy that controls it. 1 November, 2011
Joseph Kishore is a writer for WSWS.org Source: WSWS.org
DOLLAR TRAP
By Yu Yongding Chinese officials are understandably angry about the irresponsible brinkmanship demonstrated by their American counterparts in recent weeks. Unfortunately, anger counts for little in international finance. The danger facing the US is that after Tuesday’s debt deal any sense of urgency over a dire fiscal situation will dissipate. The danger for China is that it does not learn the right lesson – namely, that now is the time to end its dependency on the US dollar.
largest foreign holder of US Treasuries, either a default or a downgrade would bring huge losses. Even after this week’s debt deal, however, the risk remains that US debt will continue to grow to the point where its government is left with no option but to inflate the burden away. While there is little China can do about its existing Treasury holdings, it can rethink past policies – and ask both how it fell into this trap, and how it might free itself.
uninterruptedly for more than two decades. Inevitably this has led to an accumulation of foreign reserves. It is clear, however, that running these surpluses persistently is not in China’s best interests. A developing country, with per capita income ranking below the 100th in the world, lending to the world’s richest country for decades is not reasonable.
China is worried about the possibility of a US default for obvious reasons. As the
China has run a current account surplus and a capital account surplus almost
continued next page
Even worse is the fact that, as one of the largest foreign direct investmentabsorbing countries in the world, China
5 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
continued from page 4 essentially lends money it borrowed at a high cost back to its creditors, by buying US Treasuries, rather than importing goods and services. China holds a large stash of dollardenominated foreign assets, as well as significant amounts of renminbidenominated liabilities. Clearly this currency structure of assets and liabilities makes its net international investment position very vulnerable to any devaluation of the dollar against the renminbi.
The Chinese government has admitted that its foreign-exchange reserves have already exceeded its needs. It has tried various measures to slow down the growth of these reserves and protect the value of its existing stock. This has
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
included demand stimulation, allowing the renminbi to appreciate gradually and creating sovereign wealth funds. It has also promoted reform of international monetary systems and the internationalisation of the renminbi. Sadly, none of these has worked. With large capital inflows and a current account surplus, China’s foreign exchange reserves have continued to rise rapidly. These policies failed because they did not address the real cause of the rapid increase in foreign exchange stocks, namely state intervention aimed at controlling the pace of renminbi appreciation. The question is: what losses is China willing to bear in its foreign exchange reserves in order to slow the pace of the renminbi appreciation? One further factor is that any losses in the financial assets held by China will not be realised until their holders decide to cash out. If the US government continues to pay back its public debt, and China continues to pack its savings into US securities, this game may continue for a very long time. However,
A R T I C L E S the situation is ultimately unsustainable. The longer it continues, the more violent and destructive the final adjustment will be. If there is any lesson China can draw from the US debt ceiling crisis, it is that it must stop policies that result in further accumulation of foreign exchange reserves. Given that many large developed countries are simply printing money (and the recent rumours are that the US might return to quantitative easing) China must realise that it can no longer invest in the paper assets of the developed world. The People’s Bank of China must stop buying US dollars and allow the renminbi exchange rate to be decided by market forces as soon as possible. China should have done so a long time ago. There should be no more hesitating and dithering. To float the renminbi is not costless. However, its benefits for the Chinese economy will vastly offset those costs, while being favourable to the global economy as well. 4 August, 2011
Yu Yongding is a former member of the monetary policy committee of the Chinese central bank. Source: Financial Times
ARRESTS FOLLOW OCCUPY OAKLAND DEMONSTRATIONS By David Brown A one-day protest in Oakland, California on Wednesday that involved more than ten thousand people was followed by police action in the early morning hours of Thursday, including the use of tear gas and rubber bullets, followed by dozens of arrests. The demonstrations on Wednesday involved the participation of many workers and youth outraged over earlier police actions that led to the near-fatal injury of one protester, Iraq war veteran Scott Olsen, who was struck in the head by a projectile. The protests were among the largest organized by the Occupy
movement against inequality in the US. The day became a semi-official event, however, endorsed by the Democratic Mayor Jean Quan, who had overseen the police violence in the first place. The protests were coordinated with the trade unions, and police presence was largely absent during the day. Mayor Quan issued a statement on Wednesday saying: “We have spent the week collaborating with the Port, county, school district officials as well as clergy, business, community and activity groups to ensure that the day goes smoothly.”
Around 11 pm, however, protesters started occupying the abandoned former offices of Travelers Aid Society, a nonprofit organization for the homeless that shut down due to budget cuts. The aim of the “occupation” was to turn the building into a community center. In response the police fired tear gas and rubber bullets at protesters, and encircled the plaza. By morning dozens of protesters were arrested and at least three were hospitalized. Since the beginning of the port occupation there had been signs that the continued next page
6 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
continued from page 5 police were hoping for a provocation later. After dark a police helicopter had started circling the port shining its spotlight on protesters in the street. Since the street was already well lit with lampposts, this served no purpose other than keeping tensions high. The actions of a few individuals who broke windows and engaged in vandalism were used as a pretext for police action. As is always the case with such actions, the operations of police provocateurs is likely. According to one eyewitness who spoke to the World Socialist Web Site, some people on the protester side of the barricades responded to the initial police advance in “bizarre and erratic ways.” Most notably one man “appeared sort of out of nowhere” and “broke the windows of some local businesses and tossed trash cans at the police.” That was far more excuse than the police felt they needed to redouble their use of tear gas and rubber bullets. According to a city press release that afternoon, over 80 people were arrested. There have now been more than three thousand arrests since the Occupy movement began in September. Elsewhere in the US on Wednesday, protesters in Rochester and Seattle were arrested by police under the Democratic mayors of those cities. Police in Rochester, New York arrested 16 protesters on Wednesday and over 50 since last Friday.
FOR
A
JUST
In Seattle under Democratic Mayor Michael McGinn, at least three people protesting the CEO of JPMorgan Chase at a Sheraton Hotel where he was a keynote speaker were arrested, and six people were arrested earlier that day outside a Chase Bank. In both cases, the police made heavy use of pepper spray on large groups of protesters.
Meanwhile, the occupation of the port in Oakland ended calmly Thursday morning when a local president of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, Richard Mead, invited the last protesters to breakfast and the morning shift started work. The march on the port and its “shutdown” was agreed upon beforehand by the union bureaucracy and Democrats as a safe way for protesters to vent their anger without raising any of the deeper political questions surrounding the police violence. Together with organizers who support the occupy movement’s “no politics” approach, the unions sought to engender
DIVISIONS DEEPEN
AT
A R T I C L E S
WORLD
UN TALKS
a carnival like atmosphere to the exclusion of any political discussion. Although many people brought amplifiers and speakers to the port, they were used for music. Notably absent from the rally was any central area to speak about the issues facing workers and discuss the political issues raised by the occupy movement. None of the unions called an actual strike on Wednesday. However several, most notably the Service Employees International Union and the Oakland Education Association, encouraged their members to take personal days and join the rally with manager approval. Officials from these unions were involved in the organizational meetings to plan the event. Quan also invited city workers to take furlough days. Absent from every unions’ solidarity statement was any mention of the Democrats or the role they are playing in cutting social services and supporting the rich. Typical were the statements of George Gresham, president of SEIU 1199, the union’s biggest local, and Gerald McEntee, president of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, who told the Washington Post that they expected the Occupy Movement to support Obama in the next elections. 4 November, 2011 David Brown is a WSWS.org writer Source: WSWS.org
ON
CLIMATE
By Pilita Clark Fresh divisions have opened up on the second day of the UN climate talks in Durban as China accused the European Union of “shifting the goalposts” to make unfair demands on developing countries over a new global climate pact. In the most comprehensive Chinese statement yet on the biggest sticking point of the Durban conference, Beijing’s lead negotiator, Su Wei, said the whole international climate talks system would
be “placed in peril” if the conference did not agree on a second phase of the Kyoto protocol climate treaty. But he said countries should stick to a road map forged in Bali four years ago that meant developing countries did not have to agree to binding commitments to curb their carbon emissions. The EU, whose 27 countries are now
among the few left willing to agree to a second phase of the 1997 Kyoto protocol, the world’s only legally binding climate pact, says it will not sign up for a new round of Kyoto pledges – which developing countries are insisting on – unless all countries eventually agree to similar commitments. “We think the EU is just shifting the goalposts from one place to another and continued next page
7 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
continued from page 6 it’s a departure from what we understand the Bali balanced package to be,” Mr Su said. A second phase of Kyoto was a part of that Bali package, he said, adding: “Now the EU is talking about new conditions for them to undertake on second [Kyoto] commitment targets, so that’s not fair.” He said that since the EU was the only major group willing to consider a second phase of Kyoto, China and other large emerging economies were willing to listen to their position, but he made it clear they did not believe this necessary, given the Bali road map was already in place. “We haven’t reached agreement on the Bali package. How can we just leave that aside and then try to embark on a new
DETERMINANTS
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
mandate?” he said at a media briefing. “That is not a responsible way of conducting international co-operation. It’s also a matter of credibility and trust.” In a further sign of the antagonistic mood at the summit, Mr Su said the EU’s contentious move to charge international airlines for their carbon emissions from January had become a factor in the discussions in Durban, though he did not elaborate on precisely what this might mean. And he repeated earlier threats by the large emerging economies of China, Brazil, India and South Africa that the UNbacked carbon offset programme created under the Kyoto protocol – popular with companies in developed countries as it
OF
A R T I C L E S makes it easier for them to meet carbon emissions targets – cannot continue if there is no second phase of the Kyoto pact. Meanwhile, the World Meteorological Organisation reported 2011 is set to be the hottest year in which there has been a cooling La Niña pattern and the 10th warmest since records started more than 16 decades ago. At the same time, the UN announced that Qatar had beaten South Korea and would host the next round of climate talks at the end of next year. 29 November, 2011 Pilita
Clark is
an
environmental
correspondent for Financial Times Source: Financial Times
QATAR’S FOREIGN POLICY (PART I) By As’ad AbuKhalil
Anthony Shadid—one of the best reporters on the Middle East—wrote an article recently about Qatari foreign policy. The subject has attracted a lot of interest as of late: the Emir of Qatar and his prime minister have become dominant personalities in the meetings of the Arab League. The small state has been playing a role far beyond its traditional legacy. Qatar is now a leading Middle East country and its prime minister gets to decide whether Syria stays or leaves the Arab League. This is unprecedented. This, of course, owes much more to the role of Al Jazeera than to the gas deposits in Qatar. But the various analyses of Qatari foreign policy omit a key determinant of its foreign policy orientation. Anyone who has discussed foreign policy with the Emir of Qatar—as I have on two occasions only, the second one last year—knows that enmity toward Saudi Arabia is a key determinant of Qatari foreign policy. People were too quick to forget about the bitter SaudiQatari feud as soon as Qatar and Saudi Arabia reconciled last year. When I saw the Emir in the summer of 2010, my first question to him was along the lines: so I
take it that you and Saudi Arabia are allies now? He laughed and quickly sarcastically dismissed the notion and went on to elaborate on his still very negative views on Saudi Arabia and its role in the region. The Emir even puts his close military alliance with the US and his hosting of the US bases in the emirate in the context of his fears of a diabolical Saudi plot. The Emir reasoned that aligning with Saudi Arabia’s enemies would be a sure bet to protect his regime from a Saudi plot. The Emir wanted to prove to the US that he can be a more reliable ally than Saudi Arabia: and he went along with US Congressional pressure to normalize ties with Israel (up to a point as he had difficulty reconciling his regional alliances and his professed— privately—Arab nationalist views with his relations with Israel—which have been pursued vigorously by his prime minister). The Emir of Qatar also used Al Jazeera to pressure Saudi Arabia: anti-Saudi critics—Saudis and non-Saudis—were given ample platform to express their opposition to the House of Saud. Prince Nayef was very aware of the impact of Al Jazeera on the internal stability of the
kingdom and he presented the faction within the family that lobbied for rapprochement with Qatar, while Prince Salman and Prince Sultan were opposed and their mouthpieces reflected that disagreement. Qatar’s feud with Saudi Arabia also affected Qatari relations with other GCC countries. Qatar was quick to improve relations with any GCC member , like Oman, that had a disagreement with Saudi Arabia (the most open secret about GCC members is that they all have strong feuds and conflicts, their brotherly show of affection and solidarity notwithstanding. There are even strong conflicts within the emirates of the UAE). The feud between Qatar and Saudi Arabia is the number one reason why Qatar even launched Al Jazeera. Its very creation was intended to counter the Arab media which are overwhelmingly controlled by House of Saudi and their affiliates. What happened then better explains where things stand now, something I will address in my follow up post. 21 November, 2011
8 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
FOR
A
JUST
A R T I C L E S
WORLD
PART II So Qatar launched Al Jazeera in order to break through the media monopoly of the House of Saud (which was imposed after 1990 when Khalid Bin Sultan toured world capitals to buy all Arab media). Iraqi and Libyan money produced rival media outlets but funding ended by the early 1990s. Qatar also supported other media outlets (New TV and Al-Quds Al-‘Arabi) in order to promote views that are opposed to Saudi Arabia. When Al Jazeera was first launched it had wide parameters of expression: and it was quite hospitable to views that are opposed to Saudi Arabia. It hosted Sa‘d Faqih and Muhammad Al-Mas‘ari who critiqued the royal family (the former is a constant irritant for the House of Saud). Al Jazeera focused on Saudi matters and even went after regional allies of Saudi Arabia. To be fair, allies of Qatar were not spared either: the climate was rather free at first. But the recent rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Qatar was the product of a marriage of convenience. Qatar would no longer use Al Jazeera against Saudi Arabia (the Emir of Qatar told me that King Abdullah used to complain about my appearances on Al Jazeera), while Saudi Arabia would end its marginalization of Qatar in the region. The nature of the deal that has been building between the two countries is still a mystery but the GCC meeting that blessed the Saudi invasion of Bahrain
was crucial. GCC countries were bent on fighting democratic change. All agreed that they would stand united against any protest movement that would target any member state. Qatar shifted its policies markedly from that point onwards and its coverage of the Arab world shifted as well. Qatar not only became a dominant force within the Arab League, but it also became dominant in the GCC. Its chief regional nemesis, Husni Mubarak, was overthrown, and another regional enemy, Jordan’s King Abdullah, was busy protecting his increasingly precarious throne. Furthermore, there is a huge vacuum in Arab leadership due to the succession crisis in Saudi Arabia and aging key Saudi princes. Qatar quickly filled the void and its policies became consistent with US policies, which prevented Saudi Arabia from opposing them. And Qatar almost suddenly abandoned its previous allies: Syria, Hezbollah and Iran. Qatar became the regional enforcer on behalf of the US. It was a key actor in Libya providing NATO with token Arab cover, and it has undoubtedly served as a mediator between the various branches of the Muslim Brotherhood (and their clones) and the US. And all of a sudden, Qatar’s most reliable cleric, tele-Islamist Yusuf al-Qaradawi, made the overthrow of the Syrian regime the most urgent matter from an Islamic
point of view. (Qaradawi had in the past praised Bashar Assad but he never wavered in his loyalty to Gulf oil and gas). But the full story of the rift between Syria and Qatar has not been told: it is not clear how and why Qatar decided to break with Bashar, who has been a close ally of Qatar. It is possible that this was part of the secret Qatari-Saudi deal. It is possible that Qatar is answering to the US now (US-Qatari relations suffered a serious crisis during the Bush years. The Emir of Qatar told me that George Tenet delivered a tough message from the US president regarding Al Jazeera’s coverage and it implied a threat. And Dick Cheney abruptly ended a meeting with the Emir when the latter refused to discuss Al Jazeera’s coverage with him). But Qatar may be overplaying its hand. Its role far exceeds its size and its capabilities. To pose as a (selective) champion of democracy while preserving dynastic rule will pose a challenge sometime in the future. There are many rivals to Qatar, and Arab governments may feel increasingly uncomfortable serving as US clients. Finally, the notion that the tide of the uprisings can’t hit the Gulf region has been disproven in Oman, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Bahrain. 24 November, 2011
As’ad AbuKhalil maintains a blog, The Angry Arab News Service. Source: Al Akhbar English
BOMBS OVER CAMBODIA By Taylor Owen and Ben Kiernan In the fall of 2000, twenty-five years after the end of the war in Indochina, Bill Clinton became the first US president since Richard Nixon to visit Vietnam. While media coverage of the trip was dominated by talk of some two thousand US soldiers still classified as missing in action, a small act of great historical importance went almost unnoticed. As a humanitarian gesture, Clinton released extensive Air Force data on all American
bombings of Indochina between 1964 and 1975. Recorded using a groundbreaking ibm-designed system, the database provided extensive information on sorties conducted over Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. Clinton’s gift was intended to assist in the search for unexploded ordnance left behind during the carpet bombing of the region. Littering the countryside, often submerged under farmland, this ordnance remains a
significant humanitarian concern. It has maimed and killed farmers, and rendered valuable land all but unusable. Development and demining organizations have put the Air Force data to good use over the past six years, but have done so without noting its full implications, which turn out to be staggering. The still-incomplete database (it has continued next page
9 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
continued from page 8 several “dark” periods) reveals that from October 4, 1965, to August 15, 1973, the United States dropped far more ordnance on Cambodia than was previously believed: 2,756,941 tons’ worth, dropped in 230,516 sorties on 113,716 sites. Just over 10 percent of this bombing was indiscriminate, with 3,580 of the sites listed as having “unknown” targets and another 8,238 sites having no target listed at all. The database also shows that the bombing began four years earlier than is widely believed—not under Nixon, but under Lyndon Johnson. The impact of this bombing, the subject of much debate for the past three decades, is now clearer than ever. Civilian casualties in Cambodia drove an enraged populace into the arms of an insurgency that had enjoyed relatively little support until the bombing began, setting in motion the expansion of the Vietnam War deeper into Cambodia, a coup d’état in 1970, the rapid rise of the Khmer Rouge, and ultimately the Cambodian genocide. The data demonstrates that the way a country chooses to exit a conflict can have disastrous consequences. It therefore speaks to contemporary warfare as well, including US operations in Iraq. Despite many differences, a critical similarity links the war in Iraq with the Cambodian conflict: an increasing reliance on air power to battle a heterogeneous, volatile insurgency. We heard a terrifying noise which shook the ground; it was as if the earth trembled, rose up and opened beneath our feet. Enormous explosions lit up the sky like huge bolts of lightning; it was the American B-52s. — Cambodian bombing survivor On December 9, 1970, US President Richard Nixon telephoned his nationalsecurity adviser, Henry Kissinger, to discuss the ongoing bombing of Cambodia. This sideshow to the war in Vietnam, begun in 1965 under the Johnson administration, had already seen 475,515 tons of ordnance dropped on Cambodia, which had been a neutral
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
kingdom until nine months before the phone call, when pro-US General Lon Nol seized power. The first intense series of bombings, the Menu campaign on targets in Cambodia’s border areas — labelled Breakfast, Lunch, Supper, Dinner, Dessert, and Snack by American commanders — had concluded in May, shortly after the coup.
Nixon was facing growing congressional opposition to his Indochina policy. A joint US–South Vietnam ground invasion of Cambodia in May and June of 1970 had failed to root out Vietnamese Communists, and Nixon now wanted to covertly escalate the air attacks, which were aimed at destroying the mobile headquarters of the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army (vc/nva) in the Cambodian jungle. After telling Kissinger that the US Air Force was being unimaginative, Nixon demanded more bombing, deeper into the country: “They have got to go in there and I mean really go in...I want everything that can fly to go in there and crack the hell out of them. There is no limitation on mileage and there is no limitation on budget. Is that clear?” Kissinger knew that this order ignored Nixon’s promise to Congress that US planes would remain within thirty kilometres of the Vietnamese border, his own assurances to the public that bombing would not take place within a kilometre of any village, and military assessments stating that air strikes were like poking a beehive with a stick. He responded hesitantly: “The problem is, Mr. President, the Air Force is designed to fight an air battle against the Soviet Union. They are not designed for this war...in fact, they are not designed for any
A R T I C L E S war we are likely to have to fight.” Five minutes after his conversation with Nixon ended, Kissinger called General Alexander Haig to relay the new orders from the president: “He wants a massive bombing campaign in Cambodia. He doesn’t want to hear anything. It’s an order, it’s to be done. Anything that flies, on anything that moves. You got that?” The response from Haig, barely audible on tape, sounds like laughter. The US bombing of Cambodia remains a divisive and iconic topic. It was a mobilizing issue for the antiwar movement and is still cited regularly as an example of American war crimes. Writers such as Noam Chomsky, Christopher Hitchens, and William Shawcross emerged as influential political voices after condemning the bombing and the foreign policy it symbolized. In the years since the Vietnam War,something of a consensus has emerged on the extent of US involvement in Cambodia. The details are controversial, but the narrative begins on March 18, 1969, when the United States launched the Menu campaign. The joint US–South Vietnam ground offensive followed. For the next three years, the United States continued with air strikes under Nixon’s orders, hitting deep inside Cambodia’s borders, first to root out the vc/nva and later to protect the Lon Nol regime from growing numbers of Cambodian Communist forces. Congress cut funding for the war and imposed an end to the bombing on August 15, 1973, amid calls for Nixon’s impeachment for his deceit in escalating the campaign. October, 2006 Taylor Owen is the Senior Editor of the Canada
International
Council’s
opencanada.org Ben Kiernan is a prolific writer on the Cambodian genocide. Source:walrusmagazine.com
10 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
JESUS
MOVEMENT
WAS
FOR
A
JUST
PALESTINIAN
A R T I C L E S
WORLD
AND
WHY
IT
MATTERS
By Jehanzeb Dar Because of modern alarmist reactions to the word “Palestine,” many non-Arabs and non-Muslims take offense when it is argued that Jesus was a Palestinian (peace be upon him). Jesus’ ethnicity, skin color, and culture often accompany this conversation, but few people are willing to acknowledge the fact he was nonEuropean. A simple stroll down the Christmas aisle will show you the dominant depiction of Jesus: a blondehaired, blue-eyed, white man. Islamophobia and anti-Arab propaganda have conditioned us to view Palestinians as nothing but heartless suicide bombers, “terrorists,” and “enemies of freedom and democracy.” Perpetual media vilification and demonization of Palestinians, in contrast to the glorification of Israel, obstructs us from seeing serious issues such as the Palestinian refugee crisis, the victims of Israel’s atrocious three-week assault on Gaza during the winter of 2008-2009, the tens of thousands of homeless Palestinians, and many other struggles that are constantly addressed by human rights activists around the world. To speak from the perspective of the Palestinians, especially in casual nonArab and non-Muslim settings, generates controversy because of the alignment between Palestinians and violent stereotypes. So, how could Jesus belong to a group of people that we’re taught to dehumanize? When I’ve spoken to people about this, I’ve noticed the following responses: “No, Jesus was a Jew,” or “Jesus is not Muslim.” The mistake isn’t a surprise to me, but it certainly is revealing. Being a Palestinian does not mean one is Muslim or vice versa. Prior to the brutal and unjust dispossession of indigenous Palestinians during the creation of the state of Israel, the word “Palestine” was a geographic term applied to Palestinian Muslims, Palestinian Christians, and Palestinian Jews. Although most Palestinians are
Muslim today, there is a significant Palestinian Christian minority who are often overlooked, especially by the mainstream Western media. That dominant narrative not only distorts and misrepresents the Palestinian struggle as a religious conflict between “Muslims and Jews,” but consequentially pushes the lives of Palestinian Christians into “nonexistence.” That is, due to the media’s reluctance to report the experiences and stories of Palestinian Christians, it isn’t a surprise when white Americans are astonished by the fact that Palestinian and Arab Christians do, in fact, exist. One could argue that the very existence of Palestinian Christians is threatening, as it disrupts the sweeping and overlysimplistic “Muslim vs. Jew” Zionist narrative. To learn about many Palestinian Christians opposing Israeli military occupation, as well as Jews who oppose the occupation, is to reveal more voices, perspectives, and complexities to a conflict that has been immensely portrayed as one-sided, anti-Palestinian, and anti-Muslim. Yeshua (Jesus’ real Aramaic name) was born in Bethlehem, a Palestinian city in the West Bank and home to one of the largest Palestinian Christian communities. The Church of the Nativity, one of the oldest churches in the world, marks the birthplace of Jesus and is sacred to both Christians and Muslims. While tourists from the around the world visit the site, they are subject to Israeli checkpoints and roadblocks. The Israeli construction of the West Bank barrier also severely restricts travel for local Palestinians. In April of 2010, Israeli authorities barred Palestinian Christians from entering Jerusalem and visiting the Church of Holy Sepulchre during Easter. Yosef Zabaneh, a Palestinian Christian merchant in Ramallah, said: “The Israeli occupation in Gaza and the West Bank doesn’t distinguish between us, but treats all Palestinians with contempt.” Zabaneh’s comments allude to the
persistent dehumanization of Palestinians, as well as the erasure of Palestinians, both Christians and Muslims. By constantly casting Palestinians as the villains, even the term “Palestine” becomes “evil.” There is refusal to recognize, for example, that the word “Palestine” was used as early as the 5th century BCE by the ancient Greek historian Herodotus. John Bimson, author of “The Compact Handbook of Old Testament Life,” acknowledges the objection to the use of “Palestine”: The term ‘Palestine’ is derived from the Philistines. In the fifth century BC the Greek historian Herodotus seems to have used the term Palaistine Syria (= Philistine Syria) to refer to the whole region between Phoenicia and the Lebanon mountains in the north and Egypt in the south… Today the name “Palestine” has political overtones which many find objectionable, and for that reason some writers deliberately avoid using it. However, the alternatives are either too clumsy to be used repeatedly or else they are inaccurate when applied to certain periods, so “Palestine” remains a useful term… Deliberately avoiding the use of the name “Palestine” not only misrepresents history, but also reinforces antiPalestinian racism as acceptable. When one examines the argument against Jesus being a Palestinian, one detects a remarkable amount of hostility aimed at both Palestinians and Muslims. One cannot help but wonder, is there something threatening about identifying Jesus as a Palestinian? Professor Jack D. Forbes writes about Jesus’ multi-cultural and multi-ethnic environment: When the Romans came to dominate the area, they used the name Palestine. Thus, when Yehoshu’a [Jesus] was born, he was born a Palestinian as were all of the inhabitants of the region, Jews and non-Jews. He was also a Nazarene (being born in Nazareth) and a Galilean (born in the region of Galilee)… continued next page
11 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
continued from page 10 At the time of Yehoshu’a’s birth, Palestine was inhabited by Jewsdescendants of Hebrews, Canaanites, and many other Semitic peoples-and also by Phoenicians, Syrians, Greeks, and even Arabs. Despite these facts, there are those who use the color-blind argument: “It does not matter what Jesus’ ethnicity or skin color was. It does not matter what language he spoke. Jesus is for all people, whether you’re black, white, brown, yellow, etc.” While this is a wellintentioned expression of inclusiveness and universalism, it misses the point. When we see so many depictions of Jesus as a Euro-American white man, the ethnocentrism and race-bending needs to be called out. In respect to language, for instance, Neil DouglasKlotz, author of “The Hidden Gospel: Decoding the Spiritual Message of the Aramaic Jesus,” emphasizes the importance of understanding that Jesus spoke Aramaic, not English, and that his words, as well as his worldview, must be understood in light of Middle Eastern language and spirituality. Douglas-Klotz provides an interesting example which reminds me of the rich depth and meaning of Arabic, Urdu, and Farsi words, especially the word for “spirit” Whenever a saying of Jesus refers to spirit, we must remember that he would have used an Aramaic or Hebrew word. In both of these languages, the same word stands for spirit, breath, air, and wind. So ‘Holy Spirit’ must also be ‘Holy Breath.’ The duality between spirit and body, which we often take for granted in our Western languages falls away. If Jesus made the famous statement about speaking or sinning against the Holy Spirit (for instance, in Luke 12:10), then somehow the Middle Eastern concept of breath is also involved. Certainly, no person is superior to another based on culture, language, or skin color, but to ignore the way Jesus’ whiteness has been used to subjugate and discriminate against racial minorities in the West and many other countries is to overlook another important aspect of
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
Jesus’ teachings: Love thy neighbor as thyself. Malcolm X wrote about white supremacists and slave-owners using Christianity to justify their “moral” and “racial superiority” over blacks. In Malcolm’s own words, “The Holy Bible in the White man’s hands and its interpretations of it have been the greatest single ideological weapon for enslaving millions of non-white human beings.” Throughout history, whether it was in Jerusalem, Spain, India, Africa, or in the Americas, white so-called “Christians” cultivated a distorted interpretation of religion that was compatible with their racist, colonialist agenda.
And here we are in the 21st century where Islamophobia (also stemming from racism because the religion of Islam gets racialized) is on the rise; where people calling themselves “Christian” fear to have a black president; where members of the KKK and anti-immigration movements behave as if Jesus were an intolerant white American racist who only spoke English despite being born in the Middle East. It is astonishing how socalled “Christians” like Ann Coulter call Muslims “rag-heads” when in actuality, Jesus himself would fit the profile of a “rag-head,” too. As would Moses, Joseph, Abraham, and the rest of the Prophets (peace be upon them all). As William Rivers Pitt writes: The ugly truth which never even occurs to most Americans is that Jesus looked a lot more like an Iraqi, like an Afghani, like a Palestinian, like an Arab, than any of the paintings which grace the walls of American churches from sea to shining sea. This was an uncomfortable fact before
A R T I C L E S September 11. After the attack, it became almost a moral imperative to put as much distance between Americans and people from the Middle East as possible. Now, to suggest that Jesus shared a genealogical heritage and physical similarity to the people sitting in dog cages down in Guantanamo is to dance along the edge of treason. Without acknowledging Jesus as a native Middle Eastern person — a Palestinian — who spoke Aramaic — a Semitic language that is ancestral to Arabic and Hebrew — the West will continue to view Islam as a “foreign religion.” Hate crimes and discriminatory acts against Muslims, Arabs, and others who are perceived to be Muslim will persist. They will still be treated as “cultural outsiders.” Interesting enough, Christianity and Judaism are never considered “foreign religions,” despite having Middle Eastern origins, like Islam. As Douglas-Klotz insists, affirming Jesus as a native Middle Eastern person “enables Christians to understand that the mind and message” of Jesus arises from “the same earth as have the traditions of their Jewish and Muslim sisters and brothers.” Jesus would not prefer one race or group of people over another. I believe he would condemn today’s demonization and dehumanization of the Palestinian people, as well as the misrepresentations of him that only fuel ignorance and ethnocentrism. As a Muslim, I believe Jesus was a prophet of God, and if I were to have any say about the Christmas spirit, it would be based on Jesus’ character: humility, compassion, and Love. A love in which all people, regardless of ethnicity, race, culture, religion, gender, and sexual orientation are respected and appreciated. And in that spirit, I wish you a merry Christmas. Alaha Natarak (Aramaic: God be with you). 31 December, 2010
Jehanzeb Dar blogs at Muslim Reverie. Source: Ma’an News Agency
P.O BOX 288 Jalan Sultan 46730 Petaling Jaya Selangor Darul Ehsan MALAYSIA www.just-international.org
TERBITAN BERKALA
The International Movement for a Just World is a nonprofit international citizens’ organisation which seeks to create public awareness about injustices within the existing global system. It also attempts to develop a deeper understanding of the struggle for social justice and human dignity at the global level, guided by universal spiritual and moral values. In furtherance of these objectives, JUST has undertaken a number of activities including conducting research, publishing books and monographs, organising conferences and seminars, networking with groups and individuals and participating in public campaigns. JUST has friends and supporters in more than 130 countries and cooperates actively with other organisations which are committed to similar objectives in different parts of the world.
INTERNATIONAL MOVEMENT FOR A JUST WORLD (JUST)
Bayaran Pos Jelas Postage Paid Pejabat Pos Besar Kuala Lumpur Malaysia No. WP 1385
About the International Movement for a Just World (JUST)
It would be much appreciated if you could share this copy of the JUST Commentary with a friend or relative. Better still invite him/her to write to JUST so that we can put his/her name on our Commentary mailing list.
Please donate to JUST by Postal Order or Cheque addressed to: International Movement for a Just World P.O. Box 288, Jalan Sultan, 46730, Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia or direct to our bank account: Malayan Banking Berhad, Petaling Jaya Main Branch, 50 Jalan Sultan, 46200, Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan, MALAYSIA Account No. 5141 6917 0716 Donations from outside Malaysia should be made by Telegraphic Transfer or Bank Draft in USD$