Books and Documents

World Press (06 Nov 2017 NewAgeIslam.Com)

The defeat of ISIS may not correspond to victory for women: New Age Islam’s selection 06-11-2017

New Age Islam Edit Bureau


06 November 2017


The defeat of ISIS may not correspond to victory for women

By Hazem Saghieh

Hezbollah, Iran and dying for a tomb

By Yahya Alameer

Is Lebanon on the verge of another conflict?

By Halim Shebaya

How 'humanitarian technology' can help deal with Rohingya crisis

By Md Saimum Reza Talukder

Anti-corruption purge in Saudi was long overdue

The Khaleej Times

We must adapt our democracy to the information age – or suffer a new totalitarianism

By Juliet Samuel

Compiled by New Age Islam Edit Bureau

URL: http://newageislam.com/world-press/new-age-islam-edit-bureau/the-defeat-of-isis-may-not-correspond-to-victory-for-women--new-age-islam’s-selection-06-11-2017/d/113127



The defeat of ISIS may not correspond to victory for women

By Hazem Saghieh

It is assumed that women are the worst victims of ISIS — its savage acts, its virulent ideology and its organized sexual slavery. Therefore, it is assumed that any defeat of the ISIS will invariably be a victory for women.

However, as our colleague Khaled Suleiman stated in an article published by Daraj.com, what has happened is quite different. Up until now the marriage of a girl at the age of nine was illegal. But attempts began to reduce the age of puberty ironically when ISIS’ defeat began, as the article states.

As such there is nothing new about the amendment to the Personal Status Law in Iraq. On 8 March 2014, Iraqi Justice Ministry Hassan al-Shammariat announced the Jaafari law (followed by most Shiite) approved a girl’s marriage at the age of nine, which he believed is fair to women. It was said that reduction in the age of puberty gave the girl a great privilege as she could not be considered a minor and so became a legitimate heir to her father if he dies. It has also been stated that this law would lift injustice that women have been subjected to over the past several decades by underdeveloped social traditions and laws.

These arguments were central to the justification regarding the decision taken in 2014. However, in a span of three months ISIS occupied Iraq’s second city Mosul, and took control of large parts of the country. It was at this time that this so-called progressive law, which allows girls to get married at the age of nine, was shelved and had to wait for the right time to be implemented. Meanwhile, ISIS started to enslave and rape girls, especially of the Yazidi community. But with the liberation from ISIS, doors swung open for the implementation of the aforementioned legislation that is “fair to women”. With no ISIS in their way, it was claimed that women had emerged victorious and marriage of nine year old girls marriage became applicable. Currently, parliamentary majority in Baghdad seems determined to bring about this achievement.

Exacerbating sectarianism

The promised new legislation has other so-called “progressive features”. It prevents civil marriage between sects, or at least hinders them and makes them temporary. This calls for an amendment to the 1959 law, which exempted personal status from intervention by sectarian leaders and set the age for marriage of both sexes at 18 years.

The new situation may exacerbate sectarianism. The amendment also wants a nine-year-old girl to be able to sign her own marriage contract if there is no guardian! There is no need to be afraid here as well, because according to the votaries of this law a girl at the age of nine is fully aware about what is good for her.

“The issue is not just as some civil society organizations and women's rights organizations say, an issue that infringes upon women's rights and gives men the power to determine marriage only, but primarily infringes on the rights of children. A nine-year-old girl is still in elementary school, is not physically ready and understands nothing of sexual relationship. Nine years does not qualify her to bear responsibility of a family; actually she is not aware of it in the first place,” the aforementioned writer avers.

Thus this proposed draft law is a violation of women's rights as well as a violation of children's rights. There is also an ISIS within us. It is hard for women to win, for children to play and for Iraq to flourish as long as there is this ISIS among us.  __________

Hazem Saghieh is a Lebanese political analyst and the political editor of the London-based Arab newspaper al-Hayat.



Hezbollah, Iran and dying for a tomb

By Yahya Alameer

In Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, people are growing wary of sectarian figures and leaders who have hindered development of their countries and dragged them into internal conflicts and regional wars.

This is pretty clear in the case of Lebanon. The secretary general of Hezbollah Hasan Nasrallah is fast losing appeal among Lebanese youth. His speeches are only watched by either people who make the programs or those who find them funny. In fact, the catchword ‘Al Sayed’ has now become the butt of many jokes and videos in Lebanon.

The ‘glory’ of 2006

The party still basks in the glory of 2006, when some Lebanese and Arab communities were deceived by the idea that it had resisted, confronted and defeated Israel. Soon a murderer joined the party, who did not find any justification for his deeds except the protection of tombs — a primordial sectarian excuse that is of no significance for the Lebanese people. In fact, funerals of party members became a daily occurrence in the districts.

The party is no longer drawing even the young Shiites in Lebanon to its ranks, who earlier saw in it a model for resistance and its secretary-general as a charismatic leader. That false image has started to come off a tad.

As countries in the region gradually overcome the chaos that sprung in Arab capitals in 2011, with the young becoming more aware of the political realities, the appeal of Hezbollah has started to taper off, and many now view it more as a threat to stability.

The radical Shiite discourse is based on historical events and its obsession with the past constitutes the most problematic part of its narrative. Similarly, Sunni extremism dwells excessively on ideas from the past and seeks to impose them in the present and this is where conflict occurs.

Shiite extremism goes a step further in that it does not just seek to revive history, but also seeks to evoke old emotions and sentimentality associated with them. Sunni extremism is motivated by its excessive adherence to certain beliefs and ideas, but Shiite extremist is impelled by certain interpretations of historical events. The danger here is that it is easier to intellectually counter the radical ideas of Sunni extremism than to address the sentimentality associated with Shiite historical narratives. Events of the past cannot be changed and their imagined nostalgia is difficult to remove from a collective psyche.

The reason for the growth of Shiite extremism in the region is that it is supported by a state, which is established on extremist ideas. However, current developments in the region are increasingly posing a challenge to Iran’s expansionist designs, which includes its attempts at political and socio-cultural transformation.

One can only imagine how a group of young, war-weary Shiite fighters would feel on their return from Al-Hussein and Al-Zahraa missions in Syria, when they watch news on television about the Neom project in Saudi Arabia or Al Nahda projects in Dubai. Their hearts will be filled with rage against Iran and toward the distorted interpretation of history presented to them. These men will think about their children and whether they would also be forced to defend historical shrines and tombs.

Yahya Alameer is a Saudi researcher and writer on society and politics. He tweets @yahyaalameer.



Is Lebanon on the verge of another conflict?

By Halim Shebaya

Saudi minister of state for Arab Gulf Affairs Thamer al-Sabhan has become a household name in Lebanon.

Last Sunday, Sabhan considered the silence of Lebanon's government and people "bizarre" in relation to "the war on Saudi Arabia" which the "terrorist militia party" Hezbollah is waging.

Two days later, then Prime Minister Saad Hariri tweeted a selfie with "his excellency and friend" al-Sabhan in Riyadh. The latter reciprocated by praising the "long and fruitful meeting with my brother that led to an agreement on many issues that are of interest to the good Lebanese people. God willing, what is coming is better".

Little did the Lebanese people know that "what is coming" would be the resignation of their prime minister, who headed a government supposed to be "regaining the trust" of its people. Hariri's cabinet was part of a settlement that saw General Michel Aoun elected president, ending a two-year political deadlock in Lebanon.

Hariri politically 'abducted'?

On November 4, Saad Hariri announced his surprise resignation on Al-Arabiya channel, speaking from Riyadh rather than Beirut.

There was obviously no subtlety in the choice of location and what it meant in terms of Saudi Arabia's role in the decision.

The surprise resignation, coupled with reports of a crackdown on several ministers and princes in the kingdom, led some Twitter users to joke about Hariri's "abduction" calling on him to "blink twice if you want us to save you".

Wiam Wahhab, a Druze pro-Hezbollah politician called for the Lebanese state to do what it can to ensure Hariri's "safe return" to Beirut.

To be fair, Hariri yesterday spoke of threats to his life and an environment similar to the one in 2005, the dark year his father was assassinated triggering a series of targeted killings of politicians and journalists. It is worth noting that the Internal Security Forces denied reports about a botched assassination attempt against Hariri prior to his travel to Riyadh.

Now Hariri's resignation may well be a calculated political move aiming to boost his standing in the eyes of his constituency, as having stood up to Hezbollah.

But there is also a very good chance that this move is part of the ongoing cold war between Iran and Saudi Arabia which has dragged in Lebanon, as well.

A cold war in the Middle East

Yesterday on Kalam al-Nass, Lebanon's premier political talk show, Sabhan claimed that there is no difference between Hezbollah and other terrorist groups. In response to the host's question on whether there will be a broad anti-terrorism international coalition against Hezbollah, he said that the roots of terrorism lie within the Islamic Republic of Iran alone.

Riyadh has officially declared war on Hezbollah with al-Sabhan noting that there is no room for a "terrorist organisation" in Lebanon's government signalling that there will be no "Sunni" legitimacy for any government that includes Hezbollah ministers in the future.

In other words, President Aoun will need a lot of patience and creativity in order to secure a second government during his presidency.

The reason is that the Constitution states: "There shall be no constitutional legitimacy for any authority which contradicts the pact of mutual existence". This has been interpreted as the need for all religious groups to be represented in government for any authority to possess constitutional legitimacy within Lebanon's confessional system. Hariri's opponents used this argument in November 2006 when the government at that time was deemed unconstitutional after the resignation of the Shia ministers.

Now Saudi Arabia's role is only half the story. The other half is the ever-growing Iranian influence in Lebanon and the presence of an armed party that openly pledges allegiance to the Islamic Republic's supreme leader.

Hezbollah's decision to enter the Syrian conflict was seen by many as the inability of the Lebanese state to control major foreign policy and military decisions, allowing the armed party to cement its "state within a state".

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani added oil to the fire two weeks ago when trying to bolster his internal positioning vis-a-vis hardliners he blasted "imperialism" and America's arrogance and spoke of Iran's greatness as being "more than at any other time".

He didn't stop there, unfortunately.

Rouhani went on to say: "In Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, northern Africa, in the Persian Gulf region - where can action be taken without Iran?"

Obviously, this did not go down well in Lebanon. Ever since the political settlement on the presidency, Hariri has been facing fierce criticism of his "surrender" to Iranian hegemony.

Hariri flatly denied such accusations and claimed he was only acting in Lebanon's interest and stability. In a recent interview, his adviser Okab Sakr passionately defended Hariri's achievements saying any talk of "Sunni frustration" is out of place.

Yet, clearly, there must have been some perceptions of frustration in Riyadh, where Hariri's decisions are now taken. And clearly, the resignation is a direct response to Rouhani's claims of having a monopoly over decision-making in Lebanon.

Israel and Trump

Lebanon has long been the stage for the Iranian-Saudi regional cold war. But what makes this round of the fight special?

It is at this point no secret that Israel and Saudi Arabia are adopting an almost identical approach to the region following the dictum "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

To both, Iran presents an "existential threat" and countering its expansion is their number one priority.

In September, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised cooperation with Arab countries saying: "it is much larger than any other period in Israel's history. It's a huge change." In a speech to Chatham House last Friday, he said: "The good guys are getting together with Israel in a new way, forming an effective alliance to counter the aggression of Iran."

For Netanyahu, Hariri's resignation and statements are "a wake-up call for the international community to act against Iranian aggression".

The escalation in Lebanon has also been fuelled by the fact that the Trump administration has shown to be much more receptive of Saudi and Israeli demands than Obama's.

Talk of scrapping the nuclear deal and an increased concentration of efforts to target and sanction Hezbollah has created a context in which a confrontation in Lebanon is becoming increasingly likely.

And as researcher Joseph Bahout recently noted: "Regionally, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are now seeking ways to compensate for the loss of Syria as a place where they could defy and bleed Iran … If ever they seek to rebalance the regional relationship with Tehran in the Levant, the only place to do so would be Lebanon, despite the many risks that would accompany such an effort."

Only de-escalation can save Lebanon

Seeking to capitalise on regional and international efforts to curb Hezbollah's growing influence, Hariri and other Sunni leaders might end up driving the country back into an abyss of Sunni-Shia escalation and another violent conflict.

Cornering Hezbollah through regional and international pressure or an Israeli war will not do anything good for the country. This is especially true because Hezbollah thrives in an atmosphere of "us against the world". Apart from the fact that they are the only armed and trained political party in the country with experience of fighting Israel and a civil war in Syria.

At the same time, Hezbollah would do well to remember that one reason Saudi Arabia has supporters in Lebanon is because the party affords itself an armed wing.

The threats of "cutting the hands" of whoever wants to call for disarming Hezbollah is not winning hearts and minds in Lebanon. And putting the thorny issue of Hezbollah's weapons back on the table of a potential "national dialogue" is equally important to de-escalate rising tensions.

Of course, it is too soon to tell what Hariri's resignation will mean for Lebanon. In the meantime, non-aligned Lebanese citizens can only hope for the day when both Saudi Arabia and Iran cease their interference in their country's affairs.

Halim Shebaya is a Beirut-based political analyst and multi-disciplinary researcher.



How 'humanitarian technology' can help deal with Rohingya crisis

By Md Saimum Reza Talukder

November 06, 2017

Since August 25, 2017, the world has experienced one of the most brutal and fastest-growing humanitarian crises that led to the “textbook example of ethnic cleansing” involving the Rohingya community in Myanmar. Being a neighbouring country and respectful of their human rights, Bangladesh has since provided shelter to more than 600,000 Rohingyas who fled persecution by the Myanmar army and their local cohorts. Most of these refugees (although Bangladesh doesn't give them the refugee status, and instead considers them as displaced Myanmar citizens) are women and children.

We would not have realised the actual level of devastation on the ground had it not been for the satellite images and drone footage showing burnt villages and houses as frightened people, with whatever left of their belongings, crossed over into Bangladesh to save their lives. We also had audio-video clips and still pictures shared on social media by the victims, journalists and human rights activists. These digital technologies have revealed the gravity of the situation, mobilised popular opinion and played a crucial role to make the international community and governments listen and respond.

The role of information and communications technology in bringing up real stories about the humanitarian crises unfolding in different parts of the world has been the subject of much discussion in recent times. These technologies, besides collecting evidence, are also being used to coordinate distribution of humanitarian aids in remote areas and conflict zones.

A new term coined to address this emergent field of technology—“humanitarian technology”—is now being used by the rights activists, aid workers, social and political activists, scientists and researchers, and applied to a broadly defined context of crises, including humanitarian disasters. They are using the technologies to collect, process and disseminate information from the conflict and crisis zones worldwide.

According to an article published by the International Committee of the Red Cross, humanitarian technologies have fundamentally altered how humanitarian crises are detected and addressed, and how information is collected, analysed and disseminated. These developments are changing the possibilities for prevention, response and resource mobilisation for the humanitarian actors and the affected communities alike. They have been helping us to understand the gravity and impact of the situation on which short- and long-term policies for action are being made by the state and non-state actors. Also, these humanitarian technologies can help in evidence documentation during a crisis or conflict, which can later be used to find its root cause(s) or punish the offenders.

But using humanitarian technology can also compromise the objective of the humanitarian action and obscure issues of accountability towards the victims. Therefore, how technological innovation affects humanitarian action needs a critical enquiry. For example, Bangladesh government is collecting biometric data of the Rohingya refugees although it does not have any data protection law. It has purchased software from Tiger IT (The Daily Star, September 11), a private company, and we do not know under which policy this software company will ensure the protection of the personal data of the Rohingyas.

There is also the risk that the data might somehow be leaked to an adversary group (through hacking, for example) which will put the Rohingyas in danger during future repatriation. Moreover, international organisations like the UNHCR are also collecting baseline data of the Rohingyas through a data-gathering smartphone app. If there is no coordination among Bangladesh government and international humanitarian organisations on this matter, any difference between the databases might create an opportunity for the Myanmar authorities to discredit and delay the repatriation process.

Meanwhile, the Rohingyas are contacting their relatives inside Myanmar through WhatsApp, Viber and other social media services (Dhaka Tribune, October 26). As the mainstream media has largely failed to provide real-time information, victims are finding alternative ways (new media) to communicate inside Myanmar. For example, Rohingya refugees are reportedly receiving various video clips, text messages and still pictures of atrocities through dozens of WhatsApp groups to fill the information gap. But often the source of information is untraceable, and some of them are found to be fake news. This also raises the possibility of politically motivated disinformation which might be spread by adversary parties like ARSA and the Myanmar military junta. It also raises security concerns for the governments of Bangladesh, India and Myanmar.

But there is also the concern that over-securitisation might curtail the freedom of expression and the right to information of the Rohingyas as well. Any restriction on using humanitarian technologies might hamper the re-unification and repatriation initiatives for the Rohingyas in the long run. For example, without the humanitarian technology, Kamal and his younger brother Nazir would not have been able to reunite lost Rohingya refugees with their family members through “lost and found” booth in Kutupalong Refugee Camp (Al Jazeera, September 27; Dhaka Tribune, October 17).

It's important that the human rights of Rohingyas, despite being a stateless community, are respected and protected by all the government and non-government actors. I think there should not be any limit on the use of humanitarian technologies. Rather, the victims, governments and humanitarian aid agencies should be allowed to use them as per the “Responsible Data Principle,” according to which the collection, storage, and use of data should be carefully planned; and data should be collected for a specific purpose and deleted once that purpose has been fulfilled.

Any surveillance on the Rohingyas or restriction against the spread of fake news and politically motivated propaganda should be strictly targeted and duly authorised by a judicial authority. Also, there should be greater coordination on the use of humanitarian technologies, supported by a multi-stakeholder right-based approach which will include the victims, local people, government and non-government organisations involved in the process.

Md Saimum Reza Talukder is an advocate in District Court, Dhaka.



Anti-corruption purge in Saudi was long overdue

The Khaleej Times

November 5, 2017

Saudi nationals have long complained of rampant corruption and squandering of public funds.

By sacking at least 11 princes and dozens of former ministers on the grounds of corruption, Saudi Arabia has shown that it is rightly on the path to progressive reforms. The fact that the ousted high-ranking officials include Prince Miteb bin Abdullah who headed the National Guard  - a powerful force tasked with protecting the ruling Al Saud family and the holy sites in Makkah and Madeena - and billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, only enhances Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman's stature. He has not wasted much time since he took office as crown prince a little over four months ago. And now, as the head of the newly formed anti-corruption committee, he has taken the daring decision to purge the society of the corrupt disregarding their clout and influence, which only magnifies the faith in his leadership and his controversial, yet ambitious, reform agenda.

In complete support of the crown prince's efforts and efficiency in functioning, the Custodian of the Two Holy Shrines, King Salman bin Abdulaziz, has bestowed on the committee the right to issue arrest warrants, impose travel restrictions, freeze bank accounts, trace funds, prevent transfer of funds or liquidation of assets, and take precautionary measure until the cases reach the judiciary. The statement issued by clerics saying it is an Islamic duty to fight corruption further provides religious backing for the move. The anti-corruption drive augurs well for the region where Saudi Arabia plays a major role.

Saudi nationals have long complained of rampant corruption and squandering of public funds. This dismissal is an endeavour by the 32-year-old crown prince to create a corruption-free society, at every strata, and he has rightfully begun from the top. His aim is to attract greater local and international investments by improving the country's reputation as a place to do business. This, again, is part of a larger effort to diversify the economy and wean it from its dependence on oil revenues.



We must adapt our democracy to the information age – or suffer a new totalitarianism

By Juliet Samuel


One year ago, an “impossible” thing happened: Donald Trump was elected President of the United States. His election, on the back of promises to build a wall and dismantle the West’s major geopolitical institutions, was greeted with hysteria and prophesies of doom. A year later, his administration is mired in scandal, unable even to staff its departments, and it looks like much ado about nothing.

Don’t assume, however, that normal service will resume in a few years. Yesterday, thousands marched through London wearing Guy Fawkes masks to protest against voting, against capitalism, against government. The marchers think they are cool and alternative. But they also have much in common with the older, reactionary voters who brought Mr Trump to power. Both groups have lost faith in the institutions, conventions and values of Western liberal democracy.

It seems fitting that, with the political tectonic...


URL: http://newageislam.com/world-press/new-age-islam-edit-bureau/the-defeat-of-isis-may-not-correspond-to-victory-for-women--new-age-islam’s-selection-06-11-2017/d/113127


Compose Your Comments here:
Email (Not to be published)
Fill the text
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles and comments are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of NewAgeIslam.com.