Middle East Press on Saudi Gender Inequality, Kashmiri Shia And Palestinian Thinking: New Age Islam's Selection, 21 September 2020
By
New Age Islam Edit Bureau
21
September 2020
•The
World Has Changed, It’s Time for New Palestinian Thinking
By
Baria Alamuddin
•To
Defeat Gender Inequality in The Workplace, Saudi Arabia Needs More Data
By
Omar Al-Ubaydli
•Why
the Indian State Is Now Scared of The Kashmiri Shia
By
Raashid Maqbool
•US
Needs To Be Tough On Iran, No Matter Who Is President
By
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh
•Will
Netanyahu Now Make Peace with Israel's Arab Citizens?
By Afif
Abu Much
------
The
World Has Changed, It’s Time for New Palestinian Thinking
By
Baria Alamuddin
September
20, 2020
For those
of us who have championed the Palestinian cause for so many decades, and who
view Palestine as the just cause to end all just causes, it is daunting to be
faced with new realities. But after 73 years in which the Palestinians have
dogmatically pursued identical methods while losing more and more territory, it
is long past time for a fresh approach.
Over the
coming months the number of Arab states with diplomatic relationships with
Israel could exceed seven. If the UAE hadn’t acted when it did, Benjamin
Netanyahu would almost certainly have annexed over 30 percent of the West Bank,
permanently killing off a two-state solution. UAE Minister of State Anwar
Gargash, during a Q&A session I attended at the Emirates Society, strongly
urged Palestinians to engage, thus ensuring that this “suspension” of
annexation becomes permanent.
The Middle
East has changed beyond recognition: A succession of Arab states are embroiled
in conflict and unrest. Across the 10 poorest Arab states, two thirds of
citizens, 250 million people, struggle in dire poverty or extreme vulnerability
to it. The inability of a generation of children to attend school in Syria,
Yemen and elsewhere will reap crippling consequences.
The
millions of Palestinian refugees dispersed across the region are a component of
these terrifying poverty statistics — victims of a frozen conflict, the bitter
fruits of which were exploited to recruit impressionable young people into the
death cults of Al-Qaeda, Daesh, Hezbollah, and other terrorist groups. Let’s
say “enough!” to the Palestine cause being cited as an excuse for never
properly confronting these scourges and the myriad glaring failures in Arab
governance.
The
ayatollahs of Tehran should meanwhile deeply ponder the irony that their
persistent efforts to divide their foes have achieved the impossible — bringing
the Arabs and Israel closer together. Iran’s puppets in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria
and Yemen brought these states to the brink of ruin. Four decades of aggressive
Iranian efforts to export its revolution leave the Islamic Republic looking
more vulnerable and isolated than ever.
Israeli
politics took a terrifying lurch to the right in the post-Oslo era, based on
the myth that there was no Arab “partner for peace.” Israel’s rationale for
annexing the Jordan Valley was the strategic threat of Arab forces encroaching
from the east. Thus, Arab normalization at a stroke challenges Israel’s siege
mentality and neutralizes far-right justifications for stealing Palestinian
lands.
The accords
reached with Egypt and Jordan are often described as a “cold peace.”
Conversely, the Emiratis and Bahrainis haven’t been reluctantly dragged into a deal.
They conceded nothing. Rather, they embraced peace from a position of
strength. The UAE, which relishes doing
everything bigger and better than everybody else, is rapidly pushing ahead with
commerce, tourism, diplomacy and cultural engagement. Bahrain is proud of its
small Jewish community, with Bahraini Jews awarded ambassadorial and
legislative positions. Closer ties with Israel enhance Manama’s status as a
model for peaceful coexistence of faiths.
The
Palestinians have primarily been failed by their leaders. Senior officials in four-wheel drives and
lavish villas grew fat on the deluge of GCC funding and a cozy relationship
with Israeli officialdom, while their citizens lived in miserable poverty.
Instead of risking everything in the cause of national liberation, leaders in
Ramallah learned not to rock the boat — making-do with empty rhetoric, while
blaming all their failures on the occupation. With fractured Palestinian
leaderships unwilling to help themselves, is it any surprise that Arab states grew
frustrated at being endlessly expected to put all other priorities aside to
champion the Palestinian cause?
Certain
Palestinian factions are moving more tightly into Iran and Turkey’s embrace.
Sources inform me that President Mahmoud Abbas instructed his Foreign Minister,
Riyad Al-Maliki, to seek funding and closer alignment from Tehran. Such
manoeuvring is the surest way of throttling the Palestinian cause, leaving it
internationally stigmatized through association with pariah states. The
trajectory of Hezbollah is a cautionary tale; straying from its commitment to
confronting Israel, to being exploited by Iran to destabilize the region and
massacre Syrian citizens.
Gargash
recognized Palestinian consternation at the normalization, but expressed his hope
and confidence that “the Palestinians will come back to us.” Palestine can
avoid being one of history’s forgotten lost causes only by continued alignment
with the Arab camp. Palestine and Jerusalem are an inseparable component of our
DNA. There is no Palestinian cause without the Arab world.
Israel is
still led by Benjamin Netanyahu, who for three decades dominated Israeli
politics thanks to his embrace of the Zionist extreme right. When Jared Kushner
praises him for temporarily holding back on annexation, it’s the equivalent of
praising a bank robber for not shooting his hostages.
Palestinian
children languish in jail for challenging the occupation, and non-Jews have
been marginalized as second-class citizens under a succession of racist laws.
Millions of us who had our lives torn apart by Israeli aggression will never
forget. Israel remains the enemy until the day it, too, demonstrates readiness
for a fresh approach.
The
Bahrainis and Emiratis must use their diplomatic presence in Tel Aviv to
actively champion Palestinian human rights and the evils of occupation,
demonstrating how constructive engagement can advance the Palestinian cause.
I
accompanied Yasser Arafat during his final week in Tunisia before returning to
Gaza under the Oslo accords. He was sceptical of Israeli intentions, but
believed in the dogged pursuit of a peaceful two-state solution, which he
described as the “peace of the brave.” He realized that, faced with massive
Israeli and American military superiority, armed struggle was unwinnable.
At the
latest Arab League session, all Arab states restated their commitment to the
2002 Arab Peace Initiative. It is time for Palestinians to seize on this
starting point; taking their cause in their own hands, and defining their own
vision for peace. When they do this, they will find the Arab world in its
entirety standing alongside them.
----
Baria
Alamuddin is an award-winning journalist and broadcaster in the Middle East and
the UK. She is editor of the Media Services Syndicate and has interviewed numerous
heads of state.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1736846
-----
To
Defeat Gender Inequality in The Workplace, Saudi Arabia Needs More Data
By
Omar Al-Ubaydli
20
September 2020
Last week’s
declaration by the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Human Resource that gender
discrimination in the private sector is forbidden was a welcome step. However,
overcoming labor market gender inequality requires high quality data to avoid
misallocating valuable resources and implementing counterproductive policies.
For example,
in Chile, a law was passed requiring employers to provide working mothers with
childcare, which unintendedly resulted in lower pay for women. In Europe,
generous maternity leave policies for women have contributed to decreasing
likelihood that women rise to top management positions.
Now, Saudi
Arabia must learn from these experiences as it looks to forge a more equitable
labour market.
As an
illustration of the data problems that Saudi Arabia faces, the International
Labour Organization Global Wage Report does not have data on the female-male
wage gap in Saudi Arabia. Shoura Council members Latifah Al-Shaalan and Moudi
Al-Khalar recently found evidence of a 56 percent wage gap in certain
occupations. The belief that there exists latent inequality is reinforced by
the headline unemployment rate in 2020, which was 5.6 percent for men and 28.2
percent for women.
Yet the
research of scholars such as Harvard University’s Claudia Goldin show why more
data are needed. The simple wage gap reported in the mainstream media in all
economies is equal to the percentage difference between average male and female
earnings per hour. The appropriate way of eliminating the gap depends on which
combination of factors, such as potential stereotypes, education levels, or
societal expectations of women, are causing it.
For
example, it could be that women have lower educational qualifications or
experience, meaning that policymakers should focus their interventions on the
sources of inequality in education and experience, rather than on artificially
equalizing earnings for men and women who might have different qualifications.
For example, to counter gender inequality in the case of mathematics education,
there is significant evidence that women suffer adversely from being
inaccurately stereotyped as being inferior at quantitative reasoning, lowering
their confidence and effort, and hence their achievement in the field of
mathematics. This calls for a very specific form of countermeasure, such as
making stereotype-defying role models highly visible.
Alternatively,
it could be that women have the same educational qualifications and experience
as men, and there is no wage gap within any occupational class, but that women
do lower-salary jobs, such as a bank teller rather than a lawyer. Under these
circumstances, creating more egalitarian outcomes requires policies that
address imbalances in either the job preferences exhibited by women, or the job
opportunities that are presented to them. Some of the childcare-related interventions
mentioned were based on the view that for cultural reasons, women are expected
to allocate more time to childcare, making them attach greater value to jobs
that are compatible with family responsibilities.
Worryingly,
using high quality data, scholars sometimes find that labor-market
discrimination against women stems from bigotry or misogyny. Prior to the
high-profile downfall of Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein, on the back of his
victims’ testimony, detailed analysis of pay differentials suggested that the
economic deck was stacked against women in the movie industry. Clearly, a
robust legal response was in order, along with a series of measures seeking to
erase the exploitative norms that had taken root in Los Angeles.
Returning
to the case of Saudi Arabia as they try to create an equitable work
environment, building on the experience of Western countries is both
challenging and risky. The difficulty stems from the large number of
countermeasures, each designed to address a specific source of discrimination.
The risk stems from considerable structural differences between the economy of
Saudi Arabian and Western economies, and the distinct cultural norms. For
example, what works in the UK might have a very different effect in Saudi
Arabia. Policymakers trying to deduce the right policy mix will be left
scratching their heads.
The
solution lies in gathering and disseminating highly detailed data on females
and males in the labour market. Researchers need to know much more than a
worker’s wage: They need to know their education, their experience, the tasks
that their job requires, the physical structure of the workplace, the
flexibility of working hours, the number and ages of their children, and so on.
Moreover,
it is critical that such data be made freely available to scholars. The
improvements in our understanding of labour market gender inequality in Western
countries is not the result of small teams of government researchers with
exclusive access to sensitive data. Rather, a combination of universities,
think tanks, and civil society organizations have been analysing the data in
detail for decades, discussing their findings in conferences, and publishing
them in academic and mainstream journals. Saudi Arabia should adopt a similar
model of open data access, to accelerate the development of tailored policy
solutions in the fight against labor market discrimination. As the American
jurist Louis Brandeis once remarked: “Sunlight is said to be the best of
disinfectants.”
https://english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2020/09/20/To-defeat-gender-inequality-in-the-workplace-Saudi-Arabia-needs-more-data
-----
Why the
Indian State Is Now Scared of The Kashmiri Shia
By
Raashid Maqbool
120 Sept
2020
On August
29, the 10th day of the holy month of Muharram, known as Ashoura, Indian forces
fired pellets and tear gas shells to disperse hundreds of Shia Muslims
participating in a traditional religious procession in Indian-administered
Kashmir, seriously injuring dozens of people.
Security
forces besieged Shia mourners in the Zadibal area of Srinagar, forcing them to
seek shelter in residential compounds, as tear gas shells and pellets rained on
them. I saw young boys hit with pellets writhing in pain on the ground, as
dozens of others choked and coughed among thick clouds of tear gas, unable to
help the injured or find a safe spot to catch their breath.
Officials
later said at least 200 people were detained for participating in the Muharram
processions, and at least seven were arrested under a draconian anti-terror law
for raising anti-India slogans.
The Indian
state's decision to clamp down on this year's Muharram procession with such
force was a sign of its growing concerns over the support Kashmiri Shia started
to show for the freedom and self-determination movement in the valley.
Indian
authorities have long been pushing the narrative that Indian-administered
Kashmir's Sunni-led pro-freedom movement is shunned by Shia and other minority
communities in the region. In recent years, however, young Shia men and women
became increasingly vocal about their demand for political rights, and many of
them started to openly back the resistance against Indian rule in their
homeland.
For
decades, Shia in Kashmir have been commemorating Ashoura, the day that marks
the death of Prophet Muhammad's grandson Imam Hussein and his companions in
Karbala, with processions. The main procession that traditionally took place in
the Srinagar city centre covering 9 kilometres (5.6 miles), however, was banned
in the early 1990s, when an armed rebellion against the Indian rule commenced.
Since then,
Muharram processions have only been allowed in Shia neighbourhoods of the city.
Shia community leaders demanded the restoration of pre-1990 processions, but
local authorities denied their requests, citing "security concerns".
Since the
ban, a handful of Shia made attempts to defy the Indian state's orders and
tried to hold unauthorised Muharram processions, but this limited resistance
caused little alarm for the Indian authorities who were all but convinced that
Kashmir's Shia community posed no threat to their rule.
In 2018,
however, they noticed that things were starting to change.
A poster of
the young, popular Sunni rebel commander Burhan Wani appeared in one of the
Muharram processions in Srinagar, leaving the Indian government and security
services apprehensive. Indian troops killed Wani in an encounter in July 2016,
which led to widespread protests in Kashmir that lasted for months.
For a
section of the Shia youth to hail a Sunni rebel like Wani in a Muharram
procession was unprecedented. Being a regular participant in these processions
all my life, I had not seen anything like this before.
Seeing
Wani's face in a Muharram procession may have shocked Indian authorities, but
among Shia youths, support for the struggle for self-determination had been
growing for some time.
There is no
doubt that the Kashmir struggle is dominated by the Muslim population, a
majority of whom are Sunni. But Shia have always played some kind of role in
Kashmir's struggles. In the 1930s, Shia leaders stood next to Sunni leaders in
the anti-monarchical struggle against the Dogra rulers.
In
post-1947 political and militant assertions against Indian rule, Kashmiri Shias
played a leading role, especially in 1950s and 1960s, because of which the
community faced reprisal from the state. Socio-economic backwardness of many
Shia areas is also attributed to that vengeance.
During the
armed rebellion of the 1990s, there were exclusively Shia rebel groups like the
Hizb-al-Momineen, and Shia youths also joined other, Sunni-dominated, rebel
groups.
In recent
decades, though, sectarian violence in neighbouring Pakistan and Afghanistan
influenced Kashmiri Shia's perception of the resistance movement. They
continued to take part in Kashmir's political life - there has always been a
number of Shia both in pro-freedom groups and pro-India political parties - but
their involvement in the armed rebellion was reduced to almost nil by the early
2000s.
In
addition, some Shia religious leaders participated in the state elections amid
boycott calls from the pro-freedom leadership. And high voter turnout in some
Shia areas also led to the perception that Shia do not support "the
cause".
Of course,
Shia were not the only community in Kashmir that has voted in elections.
However, a degree of sectarian bias, mixed with tactful propaganda churned out
by the state machinery, strengthened the perception that Shia do not support
the Kashmiri resistance.
As with
other colonial powers, India has historically gained from creating divisions
across religious, sectarian, and ethnic fault lines within Kashmir - the
Sunni-Shia divide being one of them. That is why the Indian state is scared of
Shia's growing support for the resistance, and has responded so brutally to the
young Shia expressing pro-freedom slogans during Muharram processions.
There are
many reasons why Shia are now becoming more and more visible within the
Kashmiri self-determination and freedom struggle. Social media exposed Shia
youths in Kashmir to a wide variety of views and narratives on the situation in
their homeland and increasing state repression accelerated their
politicisation.
Last year,
for example, India removed Jammu and Kashmir's semi-autonomous status and fully
annexed the disputed region. It split the region into two union territories,
and brought both sections directly under New Delhi's control. The move outraged
the majority of Kashmiris, including the Shia.
Even in the
Ladakh region, where the Shia community - like the Sunni community - remained
distant to the pro-freedom movement for years, the removal of the region's
semi-autonomous status led to rapid politicisation. People living in the
Shia-majority Kargil district of Ladakh, for example, openly voiced their
rejection of the abrogation of the special status and bifurcation of Jammu and
Kashmir.
For years,
the attacks by violent Sunni groups like the Islamic State of Iraq and the
Levant (ISIL) on Shia communities, coupled with the Indian state's efforts to
brew sectarian divisions in Kashmir, limited Kashmiri Shia's participation in
the pro-freedom movement. This gave weight to the Indian state's claims that
Shia do not support the political struggle in Kashmir.
However, in
the face of increasing state repression and violence, young Shia have now
decided to articulate their own narrative and negotiate their own space in the
landscape of the Kashmiri struggle.
Muharram processions, which by their nature underline the importance of
values like justice, honour and resistance, are a potent media in their hands.
As India's
right-wing, Hindu nationalist government continues with its efforts to change
the demographics of the Muslim-majority region, Shia voices for freedom are now
rising. For decades, the Indian state was not bothered by the Kashmiri Shia's
mourning wails during Muharram. But with state-crafted narratives that long
framed Shia as overwhelmingly pro-India and anti-freedom falling apart, and
divisions within Kashmir's Muslim communities being bridged, the state is now
scared of the new, bold Shia voices calling for justice and freedom.
----
Raashid
Maqbool is a journalist and media trainer based in Srinagar, Kashmir.
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/indian-state-scared-kashmiri-shia-200916094815183.html
-----
US Needs
to Be Tough on Iran, No Matter Who Is President
By
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh
September
20, 2020
After
Hassan Rouhani became Iran’s president in 2013, then-US President Barack
Obama’s administration viewed his government as a “moderate” administration.
This assessment had a dramatic and damaging effect on the Middle East that is
still being felt today.
The
relatively inexperienced Obama administration unwisely assumed that the Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal, the lifting of sanctions on
the Iranian regime, and allowing it to rejoin the global financial system would
usher in a better era for the region and the Iranian people. However, it should
have been obvious to anyone who understands the complexities and
characteristics of the Iranian regime and the region that, not only would this
not be the case, but that Tehran had no interest in empowering its ordinary
people. Instead, it wanted to pursue its hegemonic ambitions and military
adventurism in the region.
Now, after
seven years of Rouhani’s presidency, it is clear that the so-called moderates
in the Iranian regime had no desire to prioritize peace and stability in the
Middle East. Can anyone seriously point to the region today and say that the
rush to tolerate or even embrace Iran’s “moderate” politicians has made the
region a safer, more prosperous and more stable place? The consequences are
there for all to see: A Syria torn to pieces by destructive civil war; Iran-backed
militias in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon being more emboldened to wreak havoc
across the region; and an Iran that has seen its missile program and funding of
proxies proliferate unabated due to the overly generous JCPOA.
Another
consequence of believing Iran’s so-called moderate politicians to be
constructive players was a worsening of relations with traditional US allies.
The Gulf states were needlessly excluded from the nuclear deal negotiations
with Iran, despite living on its doorstep and feeling the consequences of
Iranian proxy actions far more acutely than any of the JCPOA nations. This
generated a scenario that failed to recognize their rightful concerns about
missile proliferation and the funding of violent proxies within and next door
to their territories. The Obama administration’s soft spot for the so-called
moderate politicians of Iran, such as Rouhani and his Foreign Minister Javad
Zarif, was arguably a key factor in the Iranian regime feeling like it had even
greater license for foreign adventurism.
In recent
years, relations between the US and its traditional allies in the region have
somewhat improved. The Donald Trump White House’s “maximum pressure” campaign
on Iran, despite its many detractors, is also beginning to bear fruit, with Tehran
finally feeling the economic need to pull back resources from its band of
proxies, making it extremely difficult for them to continue fighting and
destabilizing the region. Iran’s currency, the rial, has been in freefall in
the last few weeks and has plunged to a record low. The regime is subsequently
finding it extremely difficult to acquire enough revenue to pay its employees.
Many government employees have even been protesting over their unpaid wages.
However,
there remains a sense of American disinterest in the region. This is allowing
other powers, in the form of Russia and China, to play a more prominent role;
visibly in the case of the former and more discreetly with the latter.
America’s
presidential election is the democratic contest above all others whose impact
is felt far beyond the country’s borders. That is no less true for this
November’s poll and how it will affect the Middle East. Despite America’s
gradual withdrawal from the region in recent years, the occupant of the Oval
Office still holds considerable sway and influence across the region. Whether
it is Trump or Joe Biden in office come January, pushing back against the
destabilizing activities of the Iranian regime and its hard-line agenda should
definitely be the overarching priority.
In order to
achieve this important objective, the US needs to build a bulwark against the
Iranian regime and continue building dependable, reliable security partnerships
in the Middle East. This is particularly the case given America’s reluctance to
commit troops and military hardware to the region in the numbers it once did.
The Iranian
regime is at the root of many of the major tensions seen across the Middle
East. If the US wants to avoid the destabilization of its close allies in the
Gulf and avoid giving Russia and China a freer hand, then it cannot offer
Tehran and the so-called moderates such as Rouhani even tacit acceptance. The
approach the next US president takes to this issue will define America’s
regional standing for decades to come.
-----
Dr.
Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political scientist.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1737336
----
Will
Netanyahu Now Make Peace with Israel's Arab Citizens?
By
Afif Abu Much
Sep 18,
2020
“As-Salaam
Alaikum.” That’s how Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu chose to begin his
Sept. 15 message. He continued, “to all of Israel’s friends in the Middle East:
those who are with us today, and those who will join us tomorrow.”
Netanyahu
delivered this speech at the ceremony to mark the signing of the Abraham
Accords with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain on the South Lawn of
the White House. He later tweeted that part of the speech in Arabic to all his
Twitter followers around the world. Yes, in Arabic! The very language that, just
two years ago, saw itself demoted by Netanyahu himself, from Israel’s second
official language to a language with “special status,” to use the term as it
appears in the new law.
The truth
is that anyone who has followed Netanyahu’s remarks ever since he announced the
normalization agreement between Israel and the UAE will find a man who speaks
positively about the Arabs and talks about the need to turn the page on
Israel’s relationship with the Arab world. He keeps using the Arabic word
salaam, which is very much unlike him. After all, he based his whole career on
incitement against Israel’s Arab population.
In fact,
Netanyahu’s resume is replete with all sorts of racist comments targeting
Israeli Arabs. In the second round of elections last year, Netanyahu wrote in
an automated popup Facebook message to his followers, “Arabs want to annihilate
us all: women, children, and men.” The incident, which soon came to be known as
“the chatbot of hate,” caused Facebook to announce that it was suspending his
account for 24 hours. Then there was his miserable comment last March, in
response to the election results, that the left-wing bloc has only 47 seats,
and that the Arabs are not part of the equation. All of this happened after
another famous statement during the 2015 election: “The government of the right
is at risk. Arab voters are heading to the polling stations in droves.” And
there were more. In fact, there have been all sorts of attacks and attempts to
delegitimize Israel’s Arab citizens.
One person
who noticed Netanyahu’s double standard was Knesset member and Joint List
senior Ahmad Tibi. This week, he tweeted, “I suggest that Netanyahu make peace
with 20% of the country’s population first — its Arab citizens.” In a
conversation with Al-Monitor, the chairman of the Joint List Knesset faction
added, “Instead of making what Netanyahu calls ‘peace’ with the Gulf states,
Sudan and Mauritania, he would do better to look inward and make real peace and
a social contract between the state and 20% of its population. Most of all, it
is worth his while to stop inciting against this [Israeli-Arab] population.
There is only one way to do this, and that is by adopting a Basic Law on
Equality, which will state that all citizens are equal. But Netanyahu should
take the first step by stopping the incitement and discrimination against the
[Israeli] Arab public.”
This leaves
the inevitable question: How do Netanyahu’s statements of the last month, with
their incessant embrace of the Arab world, fit in with his earlier, anti-Arab
statements? Are we seeing the emergence of a new Netanyahu? Or does
English-speaking Netanyahu, who talks about democracy and peace, change his
tune when he switches to Hebrew and describes his own Arab citizens as lepers
and pariahs?
In these
recent weeks, Netanyahu seems to be playing a game of interests. This was
particularly apparent in the story of Yakub Abu al-Kiyan of Umm al-Hiran. Abu
al-Kiyan was described as the terrorist behind a car attack in January 2017,
only to be exonerated last week, three years after he died. Only just now
Netanyahu thought it was the right time to apologize to Abu al-Kiyan’s family —
after he realized that it would bolster his attacks on the State Attorney
General’s Office.
In a
conversation with Al-Monitor, influential media personality Lucy Aharish said,
“There is no doubt that it is a historic day, when Israel normalizes its
relations with Arab states in the region. It’s a welcome event, and Netanyahu
deserves all due credit for it.” She added, “However, at the same time, it is
impossible to ignore the hypocrisy in the air. This is the same prime minister
who did not stop inciting against his Arab citizens over the last few years, in
what seemed like a well-orchestrated campaign. He fanned the flames of hatred
and used his comments to intensify the rift between Israel’s Arab and Jewish
citizens."
She noted,
‘’It’s one thing if it comes from Netanyahu, but he is surrounded by an entire
chorus that supports him and trumpets his messages. The far right joined the
racist celebration in the last few years, with racist statements taken from
darker days. But these [statements] did not merit even half a condemnation from
the prime minister himself. It is the same right wing that celebrates peace
with the Arabs from outside the country, while chanting ‘Death to the Arabs’
here at home. I am waiting for the next election campaign, in which Netanyahu
will surely use Israeli Arab citizens again as an electoral weapon. For him,
this [attacking Israeli Arabs] would be a legitimate means of winning the
election. I’d like to see how he justifies such remarks to the Emirates.”
What does
shine light on the situation is the composition of the Israeli delegation that
flew to Abu Dhabi last month. Despite all the talk about normalization and
peace, it was hard to miss the fact that there were no Arab participants,
either as journalists or official representatives. It reflects the general
attitude in Israel. The country may be home to almost 2 million Arab citizens,
but they are not really part of the game. In other words, it looks like
Netanyahu and his supporters prefer Arabs who live far away and not Arabs who
live right next to them in the same country.
So, should
Israel start to normalize relations with its Arab citizens? Imagine a situation
in which there was an Arab representative on the delegation, or an Arab
minister who met with his UAE counterpart in a meeting conducted entirely in
Arabic.
Eyal Hadid,
host of a popular radio show on Israel’s Radio al-Shams, told Al-Monitor, “The
new agreement gives Netanyahu a chance to highlight ‘good Arabs,’ who have no
demands, unlike the Palestinians. Israel’s Arab citizens will soon return to
their historic role of going to vote ‘in droves’ as soon as Netanyahu needs to
consolidate his block, and bypass [Yisrael Beitenu leader] Avigdor Liberman and
[Yamina leader] Naftali Bennett on the right.”
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/09/israel-uae-bahrain-israeli-arabs-benjamin-netanyahu.html
-----
URL: https://newageislam.com/middle-east-press/middle-east-press-saudi-gender/d/122900
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism