Middle East Press on Women Portrayed by Media, Saudi Arabia-Israel Relations and Libya: New Age Islam's Selection, 15 October 2020
By New Age Islam Edit
Bureau
15 October
2020
• Why the Way Women Are Portrayed By The Media
Matters
By Asma I. Abdulmalik
• Pompeo Calls on Saudi Arabia to Normalize Relations
with Israel
By Al-Monitor Staff
• No Peace in the Middle East without Resolving
Palestinian Issue
By Najla M. Shahwan
• Is The Normalisation Deal Really A Win For
Israel?
By Adnan Abu Amer
• Palestinian Leadership Needs To Get Its Act
Together
By Ray Hanania
• Cairo Pushes For Military Agreements in Libya
By George Mikhail
------
Why the Way Women Are Portrayed By the Media
Matters
By Asma I. Abdulmalik
October 14,
2020
Protesters
took to the streets of Swiss cities to demand gender equality in 2019.
(Reuters)
-----
Like any
normal and easily distracted person, I often find myself scrolling through
endless pages of social media posts. Between the latest beauty trends and the
current state of affairs, I stumble upon a few “non-official” local media
accounts that never fail to stir controversy.
Over the
past few months, I have noticed an increase in the frequency of posts that are
negative about women. These posts do not necessarily attack women directly, but
they include content and innuendoes that paint women in a negative light. In a
matter of a week, for example, one account posted these headlines: “Revenge on
her ex-husband — the motto of some divorcees,” “Woman files for divorce because
she can’t stand her husband,” “Women encourage others to seek divorce for
unreasonable reasons,” and “Study shows women measure a man’s affection with
material things and not emotions.” They even pose questions aiming to stimulate
male discussions, such as “Should you choose to marry a stay-at-home woman or
one that works?”
These
accounts go as far as attempting to normalize and encourage delicate social
subjects, such as polygamy, by posting successful outliers like the case of the
Gulf wife who planned and paid for her husband’s second marriage. In the same
week, the same account also conveniently selected some secondary observations
from an old study by the University of Sheffield to demonstrate that polygamy
has multiple positive benefits for the husband.
What many
might disregard as harmless online banter or random social observations and
discussions can have real negative repercussions in the long run. These
messages are, by their nature, misogynistic, stereotypical and sexist. The real
threat, however, lies in the fact that they can actually influence public opinion.
Comments
turn into discussions, which can develop into a wider debate and be picked up
by official news media channels or even government institutions. This was
evident when a simple post was published that presented the court case of a
divorced woman demanding “unreasonable” alimony from her ex-husband. The online
debate became very heated and it was eventually discussed by members of the
UAE’s Federal National Council.
I will not
delve into how these messages reinforce archaic notions of patriarchy and moral
authority. Nevertheless, it is imperative to highlight that it is becoming more
and more difficult to accept the randomness of these posts. Instead, they could
be a deliberate attempt to normalize controversial subjects and undermine the
image of women.
These
accounts are not official, nor do they belong to private corporations, but are
instead individual efforts by citizens. Their influence has grown over the
years and they now have hundreds of thousands of followers. They post the
latest local news, sometimes even before the official channels, as well as
social issues and entertaining videos. In fact, most of the content is recycled
material from international tabloids, such as the UK’s Daily Mail, or has been
cherry-picked from local court cases. Their comparative advantage lies in their
wide public outreach and the lack of official accountability.
What is
unfortunate, however, is that they champion messages that absolutely contradict
what official government establishments and media outlets advocate daily.
Official media accounts spare no expense in highlighting all the great
successes women have achieved over the years. They celebrate every break in the
glass ceiling and provide all possible means for women to excel outside of
their preconceived gender roles.
Over the
course of history, women have been defined in very narrow roles. This comes as
no surprise, since exclusively men managed the media and images and content
were tailored to men’s preferences. However, much of the media has now come a
long way, from exploiting women’s images and sexuality to now portraying them
as independent and powerful. This is why it matters how we portray women in the
media.
The mass
media is clearly no longer just about informing. It plays an important role in
shaping society and swaying public opinion. It influences our priorities and is
a vehicle for changing our laws and policies. It carries a great responsibility
in raising awareness of the pressing and relevant matters that concern us, as
well as promoting messages that inform, engage and educate for the betterment
of every group in society. What we all want is to foster a society that
promotes and respects both men and women. It is thus more important than ever
to understand that the media accounts and individuals that continue to produce
discriminatory and insulting stereotypes about women should no longer be
entertained.
-----
Asma I. Abdulmalik is an Emirati civil servant
and a writer interested in gender and development issues.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1748941
-----
Pompeo Calls On Saudi Arabia to Normalize
Relations with Israel
By Al-Monitor Staff
Oct 14,
2020
US
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, right, listens to Saudi Minister of Foreign
Affairs Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud during their meeting at the State
Department, Oct. 14, 2020, in Washington, DC. Photo by MANUEL BALCE CENETA/AFP
via Getty Images.
------
US
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urged Saudi Arabia to consider normalizing ties
with Israel, he told the press on Wednesday following a meeting with the Saudi
foreign minister as part of the inaugural US-Saudi strategic dialogue in
Washington.
During
joint remarks with Prince Faisal bin Farhan, Pompeo said the US-brokered
Abraham Accords “reflect a changing dynamic in the region.”
“We hope
Saudi Arabia will consider normalizing its relationships as well. We want to
thank them for the assistance they've had in the success of the Abraham Accords
so far,” Pompeo said, adding he was hopeful that Saudi Arabia can encourage the
Palestinians to return to negotiations with Israel.
Last month,
the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain agreed to recognize the Jewish state in
exchange for Israel agreeing to hold off annexing large portions of the West
Bank. President Donald Trump has said that he expects "five or six"
countries, including Saudi Arabia, to follow their lead and strike their own
normalization deals with Israel.
Prince
Faisal has previously said that Saudi Arabia still adheres to the Arab Peace
Initiative, which calls for recognition to be offered only in exchange for
Israel’s complete withdrawal from the Palestinian territories occupied since
1967.
But
analysts say the tiny Gulf state of Bahrain would not have agreed to the Israel
accord without the approval of its close Saudi ally. Riyadh also hinted at its
approval when granting Israeli commercial flights permission to cross its
airspace when flying to or from the UAE.
Also on
Wednesday, Pompeo said he and his Saudi counterpart “reaffirmed our mutual
commitment to countering Iranian malign activity” and added that the Trump
administration supports a “robust program of arm sales to Saudi Arabia.”
Despite
objections from lawmakers over the mounting civilian death toll in Yemen and
the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the administration pushed
through arms sales worth $8 billion to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates
and Jordan last year.
Pompeo also
said he encouraged Saudi Arabia to commit to human rights reforms, “including
the need to allow free expression and peaceful activism.”
Despite
efforts to polish its image abroad, Saudi Arabia lost its bid on Tuesday to
retain a seat on the UN Human Rights Council. The kingdom under its de facto
ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, has widened its crackdown on free
expression and jailed more than a dozen female activists.
Pompeo also
expressed concern for Americans in Saudi Arabia, including Walid Fitaihi, a
Harvard-trained physician who Saudi authorities arrested without charge in
November 2017. He was released from prison after two years but is now barred
from leaving the country.
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/10/saudi-arabia-pompeo-israel-normalization-human-rights-faisal-1.html
-----
No Peace In The Middle East Without Resolving
Palestinian Issue
By Najla M. Shahwan
October 15,
2020
During the
Sept. 15 ceremony at the White House, representatives from the United Arab
Emirates (UAE), the Kingdom of Bahrain and Israel signed agreements normalizing
relations between the two Gulf states and Israel.
Although
U.S. President Donald Trump described the event in a tweet as an “historic day
for peace in the Middle East,” these agreements are far from promoting any kind
of reconciliation in the Middle East, as they are only a declaration of the
long and quiet relationship between the three nations, which have never been in
conflict or war with one another.
These
normalization agreements make the existing relationship official and provide an
opening for stronger economic ties and military coordination. Public to public
engagement, however, cannot exist as long as the Palestinians are under
occupation.
The
previous 1979 Egypt-Israel and 1994 Israel-Jordan peace treaties did not
witness people-to-people normalization, and relations remained quite cold until
date.
As a result
of the declaration of the Bahraini agreement with Israel, there were huge
protests in the capital Manama against the government’s move alongside a joint
statement by a group of the nation's political and civil society associations,
including the Bahrain Bar Association, standing against the deal.
In Rabat,
demonstrators protested outside the Parliament of Morocco to denounce Arab
countries agreeing to normalize ties with Israel and others around the city
waved Palestinian flags, decrying the deals as “treason” and chanting
“Palestine is not for sale.”
In the Arab
world, the opposition to normalization with Tel Aviv remains strong because the
public sees Israel as an illegal occupying power. Despite this push,
governments rush toward these deals, ignoring their nations’ demands.
In
reference to the normalization agreement between Manama and Tel Aviv, Amnesty
International highlighted that no diplomatic agreement could change the legal
duties of Israel as an occupying power. It also posted on its Twitter page that
“any process aimed at a just and lasting resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict must constitute the removal of illegal Israeli settlements.”
The peace
process should also include “putting an end to the systematic violations of
human rights and ensure justice and compensation for victims of crimes under
international law,” it added.
“No
diplomatic agreement can change the legal duties of Israel as an occupying
power under international humanitarian principles nor can it deprive
Palestinians of their rights and protection by international law,” Amnesty
pointed out.
By signing
these agreements Israel did not make any concession. Tel Aviv did agree to
suspend its plan to annex the West Bank just to calm down the uproar inside and
outside the country. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, however, made
it clear that the suspension is only temporary and on the ground, Tel Aviv is
continuing to expand its settlements as evidenced by the approval of the
establishment of 5,400 new settlements in the West Bank in early October.
On the
other hand, the suspension declaration provided cover for the Gulf monarchs
from their populations who are passionate about the Palestinian cause.
For its
part, Israel is exploiting the normalization opportunity to annex more
Palestinian lands and demolish more Palestinian homes.
For
decades, the UAE and the Kingdom of Bahrain were similar to most of the Arab
world. Each rejected official diplomatic ties with Israel, insisting that
recognition is only to be implemented in return for giving the Palestinians
their full rights in their own independent state based on 1967 borders with
east Jerusalem as their capital. The new accords with Tel Aviv, however, break
this long-held principle that was a crucial asset for Palestinians and weaken a
longstanding pan-Arab position that calls for Israeli withdrawal from the
occupied territories.
On what
peace?
Signaling
an end to “land for peace," Netanyahu in a late-August news conference
said that a deal to establish full diplomatic ties with the United Arab
Emirates (UAE) proves that Israel doesn’t need to retreat from the occupied
land demanded by Palestinians to achieve peace and normalization with Arab states.
“According
to the Palestinians, and to many others in the world who agreed with them,
peace can’t be reached without conceding to the Palestinians’ demands,
including uprooting settlements, dividing Jerusalem and withdrawal to 1967
lines,” Netanyahu said in a video statement. “No more. This concept of peace
through withdrawal and weaknesses has passed from the world.”
Netanyahu
never wanted peace – a just peace, based on a just compromise for both sides.
Over the years, he has moved away from even the aspiration of reconciliation,
its place taken by collective anxieties that are systematically implanted by
personal and private matters and lately, by the so-called normalization with
some Arab states.
The
overwhelming evidence of Netanyahu’s rejection of peace is, of course, the
settlements project that expands systematically, consolidating the occupation
and creating a new status quo on the ground.
If the
Israeli prime minister really wanted to achieve peace, his first move should
have been to unconditionally end all construction in the occupied territories.
As
published in the Middle East Monitor, the former chief of Israel’s intelligence
agency Mossad, Shabtai Shavit, said in late June of 2019 to Israeli daily
Maariv that Tel Aviv does not want peace and that, if it had, it would have
done so with the Palestinian Authority (PA) long ago.
Shavit,
however, said that Netanyahu does not see the PA as a negotiating partner and
therefore refuses to develop relations with the authority. “Do you know any
other head of an Israeli government who did not talk with the Palestinians?” he
asked.
Shavit also
claimed that Netanyahu stopped speaking to the PA under pressure from the
Israeli right, who he claimed “would lynch him in the city center” if he opened
discussions today.
Shavit
continued" “We (Israel) are the strongest in the Middle East ... At this
time, no Arab coalition is likely to be formed that would endanger (Israel’s)
existence like in the 1960s and 1970s."
“The strong
can do for itself what the weak cannot do ... We can run over the other side if
we want,” he added.
Regarding
the Oslo Accords of the mid-1990s – the last substantial attempt at peace
negotiations – Shavit said that the Israeli right has since painted this
agreement as a “sin,” arguing that had they continued down this path, there
could have been peace.
“This is
not fantasy, because those who do not want peace succeeded in making large
portions of the country believe that Oslo was the mother of all sins and the
desire for peace is also a sin,” Shavit concluded.
The
Netanyahu myth is that the status quo can be indefinitely sustained and that
the international community, distracted by more immediate tragedies in the
Middle East, is losing interest in the Palestinian issue.
A wrong
thinking
For its
part, Russia said that it would be a “mistake” to think about peace in the
Middle East without resolving the Palestinian issue, noting that even if there
is “progress” in the normalization of ties between Israel and several Arab
countries, “the Palestinian problem remains acute,” and “it would be a mistake
to think that without finding a solution to it that it will be possible to
secure lasting stabilization in the Middle East.”
Moscow
urged regional and global players to “ramp up coordinated efforts” to solve the
issue adding, “Russia is ready for such joint work” included within the
framework of the diplomatic Middle East Quartet peace negotiators and in close
coordination with the Arab League, its Foreign Ministry said.
Palestinian
President Mahmoud Abbas said early this month that only an Israeli withdrawal
from its occupied territories could bring peace to the Middle East.
The war on
Palestine has been raging for 72 years, and the current circumstances are more
daunting than at any time since the 1948 Palestinian exodus “Nakba,’’ while
Trump’s so-called “deal of the century” purportedly aims at a conclusive
resolution to the conflict, denying all of Palestine's historical rights in
their occupied lands.
Even his
team member, Ambassador to Israel David Friedman demanded that the state
department stop using the term “alleged occupation,” declaring that Israel has
the “right” to annex “some, but unlikely all, of the West Bank.”
Besides,
the envoy for Israel-Palestine negotiations Jason Greenblatt stated that the
West Bank settlements “are not an obstacle to peace.” He rejected the use of
the term “occupation” in a meeting with European Union representatives and
endorsed Friedman’s views regarding annexation.
In this
painful situation when a solution seems more difficult than ever, Tel Aviv
needs to re-examine its actions that shape its peace illusions, admitting that
by its normalization with Arab countries it cannot alienate the Palestinian
cause because it is not only in the heart of the Middle East, but it is in the
heart of Israel’s stability.
Tel Aviv
must stop its settlement activities that include actions taken in that context
against the Palestinians, such as forced transfers, evictions, demolitions and
confiscations of homes, which are illegal under international law and
constitute an obstacle to a just solution.
It is
essential that to this end, meaningful negotiations on all final status issues
must resume between Israelis and Palestinians. They need to built upon their
agreed-to international parameters and international law with full respect and
implementation of Resolution 2334 to ensure sustainable peace, security and
stability in the Middle East.
-----
Najla M. Shahwan, Palestinian author,
researcher and freelance journalist; recipient of two prizes from the
Palestinian Union of Writers
https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/op-ed/no-peace-in-the-middle-east-without-resolving-palestinian-issue
----
Is The Normalisation Deal Really A Win For
Israel?
By Adnan Abu Amer
14 Oct 2020
The signing
of the deal normalising relations between Israel, Bahrain and the United Arab
Emirates caused a stir in the Middle East. It seems Israel is increasingly
gaining political ground in the region, expanding trade and financial
relations, and solidifying an Arab-Israeli axis against Iran. All of this is
happening against the will of the Palestinian people and without any concession
from the Israelis.
These
developments have raised a number of important questions on the political scene
in the Middle East. Does this diplomatic success for Israel mean that the
Palestinian question has been completely sidelined in Arab politics? Have
Palestinians lost their “veto power” on the normalisation of relations between
Arab states and Israel? Will the UAE be able to bypass the Palestinians, the
original owners of the cause, and come up with a “solution” to the Palestinian
issue?
The
Palestinian loss of ‘veto power’
For
decades, there has been a consensus among Arab states that any dealings with
Israel have to be conditioned on a “land for peace” arrangement that includes
its withdrawal from the territories it occupied during the 1967 war. That is,
the Israelis would have to give up occupied territory for the creation of an
independent Palestinian state in exchange for normalising relations with Arab
countries.
This
consensus gave an unspoken “veto power” on normalisation to the Palestinians,
making the resolution of the Palestinian issue the only way in which Israel
would be accepted in the Arab world.
What the
Emirati-Bahraini-Israeli agreement has done is basically sideline this past
Arab consensus on how to deal with the Palestinian issue and make public what
has been going on informally for years – the normalisation of relations between
Tel Aviv and Abu Dhabi.
It
demonstrates Emirati and Bahraini disregard for the long-term Arab position of
“land for peace”. Abu Dhabi and Manama have effectively given the Israelis what
they want – open political relations, trade, and backing for their anti-Iran
confrontation efforts – without any real concessions on the Palestinian issue.
For the
Palestinians, this is a clear attempt to preserve the status quo and allow the
Israelis to continue stealing Palestinian land, demolishing Palestinian homes,
imprisoning and killing Palestinians and altogether solidifying their apartheid
rule. Contrary to what the Emiratis have claimed, this deal has not stopped the
annexation of Palestinian lands on the ground.
The
Israelis do not hide their optimism that establishing full diplomatic relations
with the UAE and Bahrain will open the door to establishing full relations with
other countries, such as Oman, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, and perhaps Sudan. If
these normalisation deals continue, then it would mean that the Palestinians
have lost their “veto power” on normalisation with Israel and their cause has
lost its political value to the Arab regimes.
While the
deal is indeed bad news for the Palestinians, it is important not to exaggerate
its significance. Abu Dhabi, Tel Aviv and Washington have touted it as a “peace
for peace” (as opposed to “land for peace”) initiative, trying to equate it to
the peace agreements Egypt and Jordan concluded with Israel in the past.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the architect of the deal, like most
Israelis, knows very well that any such comparison is unrealistic.
After all,
neither Bahrain nor the UAE has actually been at war with Israel and they also
have no common borders, unlike Jordan and Egypt, which waged deadly wars
against the Israelis. The peace deals that the two countries signed with Israel
not only put an end to hostilities but also forced Israel to withdraw from
territories it had occupied.
Nothing of
such political importance was contained in the “peace” deal that Bahrain, the
UAE and Israel signed last month.
The UAE, a
peacemaker?
As bad as
this deal is for the Palestinians, it does not make the Palestinian issue go
away. Despite all the noise and PR, Israelis very well realise that
normalisation of relations with Gulf nations will not “get rid of” millions of
Palestinians. It cannot erase them from history or from reality.
There seems
to be some hope among some moderate Israelis that the UAE, the new
self-declared “peacemaker” of the region, could use the deal as a stepping
stone and wield its influence to help resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
In a recent article, former Israeli diplomat, Nadav Tamir, wrote about the
possibility of Abu Dhabi initiating new negotiations between the Palestinian
Authority and Tel Aviv to produce a settlement that includes a separate
Palestinian state.
The success
of such an initiative, however, is highly unlikely, given that the relations
between Ramallah and Abu Dhabi are at an all-time low. The PA has made it clear
it considers the Emirati deal with Israel a “betrayal” and has issued
strongly-worded condemnations.
If the UAE
fails to play a useful role in reaching a settlement with the Palestinians,
Tamir fears that the agreement with the UAE could turn from a tactical
achievement to strategic harm.
In the
short-term, normalisation with Israel only adds to the isolation of the PA and
could benefit Hamas – something that is not in the interest of Israel, which
has long used the authorities in Ramallah to indirectly depoliticise and
control the Palestinian population. In the long run, Arab normalisation with
Israel without concessions on the Palestinian issue takes away the main Arab
leverage to enforce a two-state solution, which could backfire.
A deeply
weakened PA is likely to collapse and leave the administration of Palestinian
towns and villages in the West Bank to their occupier – Israel. Such a
development would only further put to the fore the apartheid practices of the
Israeli state, giving full rights to Israeli Jews, while oppressing and
discriminating against the native Palestinian population.
This would
likely provide even more fuel into the transnational grassroots opposition to
Israeli occupation and apartheid, which is already putting significant pressure
on Israel to give the Palestinians their rights.
In this
sense, the continuing denial of statehood to the Palestinians by the Israeli
right-wing ruling elite and the collapsing support for Israel among younger
generations of Americans and Western Europeans puts the country even more
firmly on a path towards a one-state solution, where Israelis and Palestinians
would enjoy equal rights. This would effectively mean the end of the Zionist
dream of a Jewish state on all of historic Palestine.
The current
Israeli political leadership is too short-sighted to see these potential
developments. Netanyahu is enjoying the image boost the normalisation deal gave
him and is probably hoping this would secure his re-election once the ruling
coalition collapses and allow him to continue dodging jail over the corruption
crimes he is being tried for. His premiership may well go down in history as
the one that laid the groundwork for the end of the exclusive Jewish state in
Palestine.
Thus, what
may seem like a major loss for the Palestinian cause may turn out to be more
harmful for the Zionist project. Sooner or later, the Israelis will have to
face to consequences of denying Palestinian statehood.
------
Dr Adnan Abu Amer is the head of the Political
Science Department at the University of the Ummah in Gaza. He is a part-time
researcher at a number of Palestinian and Arab research centers and he
periodically writes for Al Jazeera, the New Arabic and the Monitor. He wrote more
than 20 books on the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Palestinian resistance and
Hamas.
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2020/10/14/is-the-normalisation-deal-really-a-win-for-israel/
-----
Palestinian Leadership Needs To Get Its Act
Together
By Ray Hanania
October 14,
2020
World
Jewish Congress President Ronald Lauder’s visit to Ramallah this week to meet
with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas was a significant event that
underscored the reality that there are many Jews and Israelis who genuinely
wish to achieve peace with the Palestinians.
Lauder, who
I interviewed last month following the signing of the historic Abraham Accords
between the UAE, Bahrain and Israel, is the perfect person to help bring the
Palestinians and Israelis together. During the Arab News interview, Lauder said
he believed the Abraham Accords would open the door to peace.
The
Palestinians should build on the Lauder visit and reconstruct their relations
with Israel, which reached a pinnacle in 1993 before rapidly declining
following the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin in 1995. They have descended on a
frightening trajectory into an abyss of violence, fear and uncertainty.
It was not
just what Lauder said that impressed me as we spoke for 30 minutes, it was also
his demeanor and genuine feelings for peace. Everyone speaks about Lauder’s
visit being an opportunity for Abbas and the Palestinians to step out of the
box they have been forced into.
Last week,
Saeb Erekat, the chief negotiator for the Palestinian Liberation Organization,
complained about those who have criticized Abbas’ rejection of the current
peace efforts. He stated on Twitter (in Arabic): “The Palestinian leadership is
a failure and must be changed, and the Palestinian people are ungrateful and
hateful. Why: Because it refused to have the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Jerusalem under
Israeli sovereignty, because it refused settlement and annexation, and because
it defends the Arabness of its land and sanctities, a people who offered
hundreds of thousands of martyrs and wounded and a million prisoners, then it
is accused of treason.”
First of
all, Twitter may be a good place to promote things, but it is a horrible place
to express any opinion. The limitation on the length of posts causes people to
edit thoughts down to the basics, meaning they often convey the wrong message
or impression.
I know
Erekat. We met in Jericho in 1995, when I led a delegation as national
president of the Palestinian American Congress. We found ourselves being
berated, lectured and scolded for “interfering” in Palestinian affairs. Erekat
scoffed that Palestinian Americans should “stay out” of the fight for
Palestinian justice, brushing aside the diaspora and a powerful alliance that
could have strengthened his weak and ineffective leadership.
It is clear
from last week’s tweet that Erekat is expressing the frustrations shared by
many in the Abbas administration that their actions have been judged unfairly.
Well, with all due respect, the Palestinian leadership is not a failure because
of the suffering the Palestinians have been forced to endure during 72 years of
an oppressive and brutal occupation: It is a failure because Erekat and other
leaders rely on emotion and rejectionism to respond to Israel’s many media
lies.
Mr. Erekat,
you should be everywhere the issue of Palestine is discussed, whether you like
the discussions and plans or not. You can’t hide behind our Palestinian
suffering because the diaspora has suffered just as much as you.
You should
have been in Bahrain. You should have been in Washington. You should have
spoken forcefully about the unfairness of Donald Trump’s peace deal and US
foreign policies that, by the way, are not just Republican but Democratic too.
You ran
from the media at the opening of the UN General Assembly last year. I was there
as officials representing nearly every member state stopped to speak to advance
their views, while you rushed past, brushing us aside with your hand,
frightened of the news media, like a deer in the headlights.
As
government leaders, you deserve criticism not just for failed policies but also
for failing to convey conviction. You are not an inspiration to the Palestinian
people at all, despite your suffering and ours.
This is not
just about having new elections or changing government leaders. Hamas, which
has partnered with the most extreme elements like Hezbollah, Iran, Qatar and
Islamic Jihad, has been far worse than the Palestinian Authority in pursuing
salvation for the Palestinian people. Elections won’t bring change. The problem
is deeper than that.
Achieving
Palestinian-Israeli peace is not an easy task, but it deserves your 100 percent
effort and engagement, not your personal emotions. It deserves your strategic
thinking, not your knee-jerk anger.
You need to
do a better job of bringing the diaspora together. You should reach out for
support from all Palestinians, including those who serve in the Israeli
Knesset. Most of all, you need to do a better job of strategic communications.
I have previously written about the need to provide your most eloquent
spokesperson, Hanan Ashrawi, with an effective communications budget. She has
achieved so much on a wing and a prayer; imagine what she could do with a
professional PR budget and staff?
You need to
do a better job of conveying to the world the truth, the facts and the deep
desire of the Palestinian people for a fair and just peace. You haven’t done
any of that. Your administration needs a radical change in policies and
strategy, not a further radicalization of the Palestinian movement.
Abbas and
Erekat either need to get their act together to achieve a lasting peace or get
out of the way.
-----
Ray Hanania is an award-winning former Chicago
City Hall political reporter and columnist.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1748966
-----
Cairo Pushes For Military Agreements In Libya
By George Mikhail
Oct 14,
2020
Cairo is
currently working to find a solution to the presence of armed militias in Libya
and ways to unify the military institutions and resolve the military conflict.
On Sept.
27, the Egyptian city of Hurghada hosted military talks between representatives
of the eastern Libyan National Army (LNA) and the Tripoli-based Government of
National Accord (GNA), to discuss ways to unify the military institutions and
deal with militias.
The Libyan
parties agreed at the conclusion of the talks Sept. 29 to form a military body
that includes all Libyan parties and to establish a rapid intervention force to
protect the Libyan government headquarters and oil facilities. They also agreed
to distribute military control equally among the three Libyan regions as part
of plans to integrate Libyan fighters in a unified military institution,
restructure the various security services and dissolve the militias.
Maj. Gen.
Khaled Mahjoub, director of mobilization for the LNA, said in a Sept. 28
television interview, “An agreement was reached on several points during the
Hurghada talks, most importantly on the unification of the armed forces under
the banner of the General Command of the Libyan Army.”
Mahjoub
said, “The discussions also focused on the dismantlement of the militias, the
inclusion of beneficial elements into the Libyan army and the exclusion of
criminal or terrorist ones. It was agreed that weapons will be limited to the
Libyan army.”
He added,
“A practical program was developed for the implementation of the understandings
and agreements between the Libyan parties.”
The
Hurghada talks were widely welcomed by the United States, with the US Embassy
in Libya tweeting Sept. 29, “Ambassador [Richard] Norland: ‘Egypt talks are a
sign the UN-facilitated process is working.’”
On Oct. 5,
Norland visited Cairo, where he met with the director of Egyptian intelligence,
Maj. Gen. Abbas Kamel. The two discussed the outcomes of the Hurghada talks and
the Egyptian efforts to unify the Libyan institutions. Norland described the
meeting as “fruitful.”
Norland
also met with the speaker of the Tobruk-based Libyan Parliament, Aguila Saleh.
The two parties agreed on the need to expel foreign fighters and Turkish
military advisers from Libya, dismantle the militias and form a unified
security apparatus.
In an Oct.
7 interview with the Egyptian newspaper Al-Akhbar, Norland said, “We are happy
with the outcome of the Hurghada talks, as an important step toward
de-escalation and activating the cease-fire in Libya.”
Norland
went on, “On the agenda as well, there is a need to support the efforts led by
the Libyans to round up the militias across the country and disarm them. It is
difficult to achieve that unless through a united and strong Libyan security
[apparatus].”
He said,
“Egypt has helped expand the political dialogue between the west and the east
in Libya and is still playing an important role. This is why I visited Cairo to
consult on the best ways to support the Libyan political dialogue forum and the
next steps toward a permanent political settlement to the war and conflict in
Libya.”
Meanwhile,
the United Nations is to host intra-Libyan political and military talks in
Geneva on Oct. 19. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said
in an Oct. 10 press statement, “One hundred Libyan figures will attend the
forum, including supporters of the [former Moammar] Gadhafi regime.”
She said,
“The invitees are trusted politicians and public figures from the three Libyan
regions, with the aim to draft agreements on establishing a unified
transitional authority for Libya,” adding, “The recent talks in Hurghada
between security representatives of the two conflicting parties is a good basis
to resume the work of the 5+5 Libyan Joint Military Commission.”
The 5+5
Libyan Joint Military Commission was formed following the Jan. 19 Berlin
Conference on Libya, where it was agreed to select five officers from the LNA
and five from the GNA to conduct negotiations.
Ali Saidi,
a member of the Tobruk-based House of Representatives, told Al-Monitor, “Cairo
is striving to end the Libyan crisis and achieve stability in the country.”
Saidi
added, “The LNA’s representatives agreed at the Hurghada talks on the inclusion
of members of the armed groups, but under some conditions, namely that they be
medically fit and hold a clear criminal record, in order to achieve Cairo’s
goal of unifying the Libyan military establishment.”
He said,
“It was agreed to unify the military institution [and] to include elements from
the three regions of Libya, namely Cyrenaica, Fezzan and Tripoli.”
Saidi went
on, “The GNA military team taking part in the negotiations does not have the
ability to control the armed militias. This could be the main obstacle to the
implementation of the agreements reached by the military parties in Hurghada.”
Tarek
Fahmy, a political science professor at Cairo University, told Al-Monitor,
“Cairo stirred up the stagnant water in the Libyan military file. The Hurghada
talks are the first military agreement between the Libyan parties.”
Fahmy
added, “The Hurghada talks have received international and US support. The
international community has faith that a successful military track in Libya is
a real guarantee for the success of the political track.”
He said, “The
US ambassador to Libya visited Cairo after the end of the Hurghada talks to
affirm the US support for the results of the talks and the agreement to
dismantle the militias.”
He pointed
out, “The Libyan army did not agree to include terrorist elements from the
militias in western Libya, contrary to the GNA and Turkish desires. The
Egyptians also refused to include terrorist elements who have a criminal record
within the ranks of the Libyan army.”
He
continued, “The international community and the US are working toward
eliminating the militias and preparing a black list of terrorists, while
leaving the opportunity for other elements to join the Libyan army in order to
unify the military establishment and ensure that the military conflict is not
renewed.”
“Cairo will
depend on US and European support in implementing the outcomes of the Hurghada
talks to resolve the militia crisis in Libya,” Fahmy concluded.
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/10/egypt-libya-military-talks-solution-militias-unified-army.html
-----
URL: https://newageislam.com/middle-east-press/middle-east-press-women-portrayed/d/123146
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