Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, August 2002, page 84-89

Activisms

Arab-American Activism

ADC Annual Convention Provides Hope in Terrible Times

Dr. Ziad Asali, president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), welcomed attendees to its three-day Annual National Convention on June 7 at the Crystal City Gateway Marriott. ADC, he said, “wanted this convention, after the tumultuous events of this past year, to be a political statement, a social event, and a festival of celebration and remembrance.” He told ADC participants that they “are giving a message to our community, to our nation, to the Arab world and to the world at large that the Arab-American community is standing together tall and proud. Proud of who we are and of what we stand for.”

Addressing post-9/11 challenges for Arab Americans, Dr. Asali said, “We are here to claim our rightful place in this great human experiment that is called America, a place that makes it possible for us to pursue our individual fulfillment, our right to speak our minds and our right to associate freely in order to define and defend our individual and communal rights and interests.

“An array of cultural, ethnic, religious, economic and historical factors have converged to engender discrimination against Arab Americans. However, we need to keep in mind that this is an American challenge that has been met by many groups throughout U.S. history as well as at the present time.…

“We must face this challenge and defeat it, just as others before us have. We need to state—no, we need to feel and convey to all—that we are first-class citizens of this country and will yield no ground to anyone who will treat us otherwise. The gains in the struggle for equality and civil rights in this country, achieved through the heroic efforts of so many good people over the past half-century, cannot be allowed to be so readily relinquished as they apply to Arab and Muslim Americans. It is our historic task, at this hour of vulnerability and peril, to hold the banner of equality, of liberty and justice for all.”

He concluded his invigorating speech by saying, “You, my friends, who are here, are called upon to do more, but so are the people who are not here today. Let us concentrate on the steps we can take rather than the obstacles that are in our way. Let us enter the arena; the door is open. Tonight let us take the first step.”

—Delinda C. Hanley

Flying While Brown

At a Friday, June 7, ADC conference presentation, Mohammed Ali, a victim of airline passenger discrimination, and his lawyer, Christy Lopez of Relman and Associates, described various cases where Arab (or Arab-looking) Americans were removed from passenger aircraft on discriminatory grounds.

Lopez laid the groundwork for the discussion by differentiating between two separate but related issues: profiling and discrimination. Profiling, she explained, occurs when airline personnel pinpoint an individual as a potential security threat based on his or her race or religion. Post-9/11 airline passenger paranoia has given rise to an unprecedented number of profiling cases, she claimed, where Arab passengers appear suspicious for talking too much, or for talking too little. While they supposedly are “randomly checked,” she stated, in reality, the checks are not random at all. “We must have a strong and consistent voice that says this is not right and not legal,” she said, since security threats are not based on ethnicity.

Discrimination goes one step—an illogical step—further, Lopez continued. She described three lawsuits that have been brought against the airlines to illustrate discrimination. In one case, a man of Saudi Arabian descent flew from California to New York. He passed through all the security checks with no problems and boarded the plane. He experienced difficulties with putting his bag in the overhead bin and was approached by an airline attendant, who asked, “Where are you flying to?” When he replied, “Saudi Arabia,” he was swiftly removed from the plane. “We know it was not about security,” Lopez explained, “because his bags were left on the plane.”

In a second case, a man of Arab descent was flying to San Francisco. He was pulled from the boarding line, Lopez said, because his name appeared on a list. The FBI was called to conduct a background check and, upon finding nothing suspicious, he was cleared. The airline pilot, however, refused to allow him to board the plane. “He was found guilty although proven innocent,” Lopez said.

In a third case of airline discrimination, “there were simply too many brown people near the front of the plane,” Lopez claimed, including an Indian, a Filipino and a South American. An airline passenger told an attendant, “Those brown men seem suspicious to me.” The pilot approved their removal from the plane.

As these cases prove, Lopez said, Arabs, and those who look like Arabs, have become second-class citizens.

“The good news is that this is illegal,” she told the audience. “We have laws against this, and we can fight it.”

Security decisions must be made for security reasons, Lopez explained. Race does not, and must not, factor into security debates, she argued, concluding, “We need to make sure this is a momentary blip.”

The microphone was then passed to Mohammad Ali, a victim of airline discrimination. Mr. Ali was flying on United Airlines (with whom he is a “frequent flyer”) from Washington, DC to Boston on the morning of Oct. 4, 2001. He passed through security without incident, boarded the plane, and began reading the newspaper. Soon an airline attendant approached him and said, “Mr. Ali, we have to ask you a few additional security questions. Would you gather your belongings and come with me?”

Ali cooperated without hesitation. He provided the security officials with his immigation documents (carried on his person since 9/11), and was questioned for 45 minutes by the FBI. The FBI then determined that Mr. Ali was not a security threat, handed his papers back, and said he was free to go. Mr. Ali again proceeded to board the plane.

However, he said, “I was stopped by a security manager.” The security manager went to speak with the pilot and came back to tell Ali, “Because of a crew request, you will not be able to fly on this plane.”

When questioning the security manager’s decision, Ali was told that he was removed because of “information,” but was never told the nature of this information. Ali was forced to take the following flight departing at 2:45.

“I understand the security concerns after 9/11 and have no issues with security measures,” Ali said. “My wish is to be treated with respect and dignity”—a wish guaranteed not only by U.S. law, but by international law.

—Kristel Halter

Bush Administration, Palestinian Representatives Address ADC Banquet

Under Secretary of State David Satterfield, a former U.S. ambassador to Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, gave a masterful speech at the ADC banquet June 8. Addressing Arab-American concerns in the Middle East and post-9/11 at home, he said the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has gone on far too long, and caused a terrible loss of life and unacceptable existence on both sides.

The Bush administration is determined to address this situation, Satterfield assured the audience. American officials have visited the region, and various world leaders have shared their views with the president on how to make progress for peace in Washington, DC. Everyone agrees, Satterfield said, that “it’s time to step back from the abyss. There is no military resolution to this conflict.”

Turning to domestic issues for Arab Americans, Satterfield said that in times of plenty it is easy to be an American. In difficult days like these, however, fundamental American values should come through. He reminded the audience that this government has zero tolerance for hate crimes and that President George W. Bush had visited Washington, DC’s Islamic Center six days after the 9/11 attack on America to show that America is broad enough to accommodate all ethnicities and religions. There will be no condemnations of the great Islamic religion from this administration, Satterfield said. “This is a nation of immigrants,” with welcoming open doors, he added. “That’s why we’re great. Our diversity defines us as a nation.”

Satterfield ended his remarks by encouraging ADC members to continue to educate Americans about the Arab world. At home Arab Americans “are on the front lines of defending America,” he said, and encouraged Arab Americans to spread the American message of tolerance and respect to the countries from which the audience came.

—Delinda C. Hanley

Civil Rights Luncheon

You could tell upon entering the banquet room at the Crystal City Gateway Marriott Hotel on June 7 that this wasn’t your average luncheon. To begin with, there were Arabs everywhere, chatting away, happily munching on pita bread and hummus. Then Bob Dole walked in, followed by Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel and the leaders of the ADC.

As the applause died down, ADC Board of Directors Chairman Ahmad Sbaiti approached the microphone and welcomed the mostly Arab-American audience to what would turn out to be a very strange lunch indeed.

To begin with, 9/11 was at the top of the agenda. Sbaiti condemned the attacks, saying “our hearts go out to the victims’ families.” He made no mention of the backlash directed against Arab Americans post-9/11—an upsetting lapse, considering his audience, which included prominent targets of anti-Arab discrimination the likes of Florida Prof. Sami Al-Arian.

Restating his commitment to helping the victims’ families, Sbaiti proudly held up a check for $90,000 to be presented to Mr. Dole, who, along with former President Bill Clinton, heads a scholarship fund for children of 9/11 victims. Accepting the money, Dole’s entire comments can be summed up in one word: “Thanks.”

While most attendees applauded the move—and the quickly departing Dole—many were left wondering why the money wasn’t being sent to Jenin, or Nablus, or Ramallah. “I understand the politics behind it,” said one, “but why $90,000? Why not $50?” Several audience members were perturbed by Dole’s brief comments, which included no mention of Palestinian suffering—the topic on everyone’s mind.

Ironically, it wasn’t an ADC official who finally addressed the audience’s concerns. When Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) took the microphone, he also took the entire audience by surprise: “Israel is our friend and ally, and we must continue our commitment,” he said, “but not at the expense of the Palestinian people.”

The cheers were deafening. Hagel went on: “What we need isn’t a cease-fire, leading to a sequential peace process, leading to negotiations on a Palestinian state, leading to negotiations on refugees, Jerusalem, etc. That time has passed. An end game must be brought to the front, now.”

—Nizar Wattad

Civil Rights Panels

One could practically still hear the applause an hour later as conference attendees split up to attend various afternoon panels, one of which dealt with the impact of 9/11 on civil rights.

Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, summed it up: “The days after 9/11 have been very dark days for civil rights.” The Bush administration, she said, has taken several measures that infringe on fundamental constitutional rights and freedom, including secretly detaining individuals for indefinite periods of time and forcing the registration of foreign visitors from Arab and Muslim countries upon entering the United States. Worse, the executive branch has adopted these measures without consulting Congress or the courts.

The latter point was troubling to speaker Greg Nojeim, associate director of the American Civil Liberties Union. “The PATRIOT Act”—legislation passed immediately following 9/11 that grants the president more authority than any other document in American history—“attacks the role of judges by writing them out of the process,” Nojeim said. Among other rights infringements, the act authorizes ‘secret searches of citizens’ homes, which can be conducted without the use of a warrant or even notifying the individual in question. Said Nojeim, “It puts the CIA firmly back in the business of spying on Americans.”

On the president’s unprecedented power under the Patriot Act, Nojeim insisted “this is not about due process. It’s about whether one man—the president—can determine who gets rights and who doesn’t. It’s a fundamental re-ordering of our society.”

Georgetown Law Prof. David Cole, active in the defense of the infamous “L.A. 8,” drove the point home: “9/11 changed everything.”

As each speaker left the podium, moderator Denyse Sabagh emphasized the need to write, call, e-mail or otherwise contact elected officials and voice opposition to the negative effects the administration’s policies have had on American civil rights. “Don’t be scared silent,” she said. “We can be, we must be, safe and free.”

—Nizar Wattad

Acting on Impulse

As Arab Americans from around the country dashed from one panel to the next, one conference attendee was disturbed by the amount of coffee being consumed—specifically Starbucks coffee. “Don’t these people know they should boycott Starbucks?” inquired the concerned individual, who asked not to be named. He was referring to a nationwide boycott campaign targeted at Starbucks International after chairman Howard Schultz made statements supporting Israel’s occupation and criticizing Palestinians.

The ADC member went home that night and printed hundreds of flyers announcing the boycott, and handed them out to other attendees the next day. “It went over like gangbusters,” he said. “Everybody was extremely receptive and even apologetic for buying Starbucks…By mid-afternoon I did not see more than a handful of people drinking Starbucks, and the line at the shop was dead. There were even others who ‘parked’ themselves at the Starbucks vendor and told people in line before they bought anything.”

—Nizar Wattad

Hanan Ashrawi Discusses Critical Situation in Palestine

After a very difficult trip leaving Palestine to reach the ADC Convention, Hanan Ashrawi gave a riveting address to banquet attendees on June 8, 2002.

“I can tell you honestly that not since the Nakba of 1948 have we witnessed or have we undergone such a decisive, critical and painful moment in history,” Ashrawi said. “I haven’t seen such a concentration of raw pain in Palestine and an unleashing of violence, unbridled violence, on the innocents.”

She is worried about an increasingly fundamentalist mindset, she said, “particularly in Israel, where we are witnessing a reversal into fundamentalist Zionism with people like Sharon saying they want to complete Israel’s war of Independence and take us back to the either/or equation. We are also witnessing a revival of the discourse of fear, of survival, of exclusion, and a systemic and brutal and cruel daily assault on the essence, on the core of Palestinian reality, identity and cause…”

Israel’s agenda is no secret, Ashrawi observed: “Sharon said from the beginning that he is going to unravel, destroy the peace process, the signed agreements, the declaration of principles, even the Oslo process with all of its flaws, if it’s the last thing he does, and he has succeeded. He wants to enter into a period of longtime transitional arrangements and agreements without achieving any kind of peace agreement or peace treaty. He wants to reach a state of nonbelligerency, as though there can be a state of nonbelligerency or peace between occupier and occupied.”

Sharon thinks that the occupation can be normalized, Ashrawi said, and Palestinians can be tamed to become “nice, peaceful, docile natives.” Israel has been allowed to use the full force of its military, the fourth strongest army in the world, against a captive, defenseless, and largely civilian population.

However, Ashrawi warned, “No people in a situation of occupation or colonialism will ever accept the loss of freedom, will ever adapt to enslavement, and will continue to struggle and to yearn for freedom, for independence, for dignity, for liberty on their own land.” Vowed Ashrawi, “No amount of military force or military brutality can crush the spirit of these people or stop the struggle or yearning for freedom.”

Ashrawi called for a clear plan of action, a clear road map, and separation—not with fences, but by third parties, and right now: troops, monitors, international forces to put an end to this cycle of violence and revenge.

Turning to criticism of Chairman Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority, Ashrawi acknowledged, “In Palestine we are in need of reform, yes, and we are in need of democratization, yes, and we are in need of establishing a system of governance that is inclusive, that is human-based, and that is based, of course, on the rule of law, the separation of powers, we know all these things.”

She would like to remind the Israelis, she said, “who thought that they invented the term ‘reform,’ that long before the state of Israel was even an idea in somebody’s heads we had elections in Palestine, we had education in Palestine, we had organizations, institutions, civil society in Palestine…”

Reform is not a tool for Israel, or for the U.S., she argued. “It’s an inherent and authentic Palestinian need, and we will do it,” Ashrawi said. “It’s not an excuse to avoid tackling the real issue, which is the occupation. In the same way which I tell the Palestinians that the occupation is not an excuse for avoiding human rights, democracy and reform.”

Ashrawi described a captive civilian population whose real need is to have a day in the sunshine, and freedom to be able to live, in peace and security, on their own land. “We don’t have land designs, we don’t have unrealistic visions,” she reminded the rapt audience, “all we need is to be like other people—free, independent, living on our own land, taking care of our families, of our children, and we need the luxury of these little dreams and aspirations. We do not want constantly to be like tragic heroes, facing the fact of our mortality everyday, fighting the forces of evil and good, we leave that to President Bush…”

Ashrawi concluded her well-received remarks by saying there is still among Palestinians an overwhelming commitment to peace as well as to democracy. In order to get peace, however, the occupation must end, she stated. “Palestinians have demonstrated so much resilience, so much tenacity, so much ability to withstand pressure and not to be broken. This to me is the greatest source of hope and of confidence,” she said. “All this brutality has not succeeded in breaking the will of the Palestinians or in crushing their spirits.”

—Delinda C. Hanley

Sharon the Indicted War Criminal

The main message Chibli Mallat—as the primary lawyer in the war crimes suit against Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for the 1982 massacre of Lebanon’s Sabra and Shatila refugee camps—wanted to impress upon the large crowd who came to see him speak at the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) conference on June 8 was that Sharon was indeed an indicted war criminal. Moreover, Mallat reminded the audience, those interested in justice must also remind others at every opportunity that Israel’s sitting prime minister, whom President Bush called a man of peace, is an indicted war criminal.

Telling the audience that they all knew the story of how Sharon incited the Phalangists to massacre many of the inhabitants of Sabra and Shatila on the fringes of Beirut during Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, and of how a commission in his own country found him responsible, Mallat chose instead to focus on recent developments in the case and the need to constantly remind “good-hearted Americans” why Sharon should be imprisoned. Mallat first briefly discussed how Israel managed to thwart U.N. Resolution 1405 to investigate Israeli actions in Jenin in April of 2002, and quoted Sharon as saying, “We will never allow Israel or Israelis to be judged, never.” According to Mallat, it was on the advice of a Cambridge law professor that Israel refused to abide by the resolution, as it would open the door to possible trials of Israelis on charges of war crimes.

As to the progress of the case against Sharon, Mallat said that various allegations in the case had been terminated or were incorrect, and that there would be a ruling on June 26, 2002 as to whether the case could go forward. Mallat contended that if he won the ruling it would be an historical decision for humanitarian law, but that there were no precedents and no standards, making any prediction of the outcome impossible. (Editor’s note: The court ruled for Sharon and against the plaintiffs. Amnesty International has appealed this ruling.)

Mallat explained that there were three major crimes of which Sharon was accused, based on decisions taken in Nuremberg and at various Geneva Conventions: war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. However, he added, the 9/11 attacks on the U.S. also should have been prosecuted as war crimes, as ”terror” had never been defined under international law. Such action would have yielded far different results, according to Mallat, a police action rather than a war.

Mallat concluded by telling the audience that in the past year the case against Sharon had been very actively pursued, though unrecorded in the U.S. press. For the most part, he said, it had been well received. If Mallat and those he represents—the families of the Sabra and Shatila victims—won on June 26, the world could expect Sharon to appeal. If, on the other hand, Sharon wins, Mallat will appeal, he said. However, he pointed out, the plaintiffs had the support of a number of human rights groups, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and others, as well as the aid and support of about 300 lawyers, including law students at Yale University, who had been very helpful preparing briefs and doing research.

In conclusion, he exhorted the audience once again to drive home the point to the U.S. public that Sharon is an indicted war criminal. If all goes well with Mallat’s case, moreover, Sharon will become a convicted war criminal.

—Sara Powell

A Vision for Palestine

This year’s ADC conference came to a close on Sunday, June 9, with a luncheon which will be remembered by all participants for its inspiring speakers.

Michael Tarazi, legal adviser to the Palestinian Authority, spoke of his vision for Palestine in light of a Palestinian state attainable through the negotiation of big issues such as settlements and Jersusalem, and then the hammering out of smaller details. Only through such a method, he stressed, will negotiations bear fruit.

Hasan Abdel Rahman, PLO representative to the U.S., criticized the current state of the conflict, the U.S. role therein and, most especially, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s veto power over U.S. foreign policy. He condemned Israel’s iron fist, emphasizing that the Palestinian people cannot be crushed by brute force. As the past 19 months have testified, Abdel Rahman said, “it is not the power of logic that prevails, but the logic of power.” There will be no winner under such conditions, he argued, as both sides will lose to persisting violence. Instead, both parties must not lose sight of the fact that this is not a military conflict, but a political one. As such, he concluded, it will only be solved through political dialogue.

Ambassador Clovis Maksoud demanded that Arab Americans unite in an effort to reconstruct the Arab national narrative in a time when its deconstruction has, for some, become a priority. Palestinian resistance must be reconstructed away from “suicide bombing,” as well as hopelesness and dehumanization, which are being used by those with a Zionist agenda to annihilate peace. Let us not forget, the ambassador reminded his audience, that it was an American who first uttered the words, “Give me liberty or give me death.“ “We can change the realities,” Maksoud said, “but we must be emboldened, clear, grounded in realism and in a vision of the future. This is the challenge and this is the dialogue of the new generations.”

—Kristel Halter

U.S. Foreign Policy on the Middle East

At its 19th annual convention, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) presented a panel June 8 entitled “A Century of U.S. Foreign Policy: From Wilson to Bush.” Dr. Michael Hudson of Georgetown University moderated the discussion among Kathleen Christison, former CIA analyst and author of The Wound of Dispossession and Telling the Palestinian Story (both available from the AET book club), Dr. Richard Norton of Boston University, and Dr. Shibley Telhami of the University of Maryland. The panelists traced the differences in policies and attitudes from Wilson, who endorsed the Balfour Declaration, to the current president, George W. Bush, who, while calling for a Palestinian state, has failed to ensure any action toward establishing such a state.

Each panelist offered a differing perspective of the history of U.S. Mideast policy. Christison discussed the emotional and mythical ties between the U.S. and Israel, while Telhami focused on the divisions between domestic and foreign policy, and Norton described changes in rhetoric and practice, rather than in perception, over the years.

All, however, seemed to question the wisdom of current U.S. policy toward the region. Christison spoke of the growing popular opposition to Israeli occupation, and both she and Telhami agreed that there should be a massive effort to educate U.S. policymakers, including members of Congress. Norton said that Bush’s stated intentions against Iraq were not supported internationally, and all agreed there would be changes eventually, as both the domestic population and the international community would insist on that. People of conscience must hope these changes come sooner rather than later.

—Sara Powell

Palestinian Scholar Receives Distinguished Public Service Award

Fulbright Scholar Samer Abu-Ghazaleh, MBA, received the “Distinguished Public Service Award” from Northeastern University’s Political Science Department on June 6, 2002. Abu-Ghazaleh, who was awarded the Fulbright Scholarship in 1997 to study for his MBA degree, is an alumnus of the university, where he received his bachelor of science degree in political science in 1997 and his MBA in 2001.

The NU Political Science Department gave Abu-Ghazaleh the award in recognition of his commitment to educating the public about political, social, and humanitarian issues. As department chairman Prof. Denis Sullivan said at the award ceremony dinner, this was “the first time a recipient of this award has distinguished himself or herself in both an international and local public service capacity.”

Added Professor Sullivan, “Samer, you are a leader in helping our greater community rebuild our sense of security and freedom as we all strive for the public service ideal of ‘E Pluribus Unum,’ out of many, one.”

Both before and since 9/11 Abu-Ghazaleh has delivered numerous speeches and lectures and taken part in panel discussions and educational forums on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, prospects for peace, and the current economic and on-the-ground situation in the occupied territories. After 9/11, Abu Ghazaleh also took part in over two dozen volunteer lectures and forums related to educating the public about Islam, Muslim Americans, Arab Americans, the importance of inter-faith and inter-cultural dialogue, and community bridge-building. Venues included churches, synagogues, universities, government agencies, and cultural institutions at various locations throughout Massachusetts.

Abu-Ghazaleh also lectured in both France and Switzerland in 2000 on topics such as tolerance and reconciliation, as well as the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. In 1999 he was the primary organizer and host of a delegation of world leaders and scholars who visited Gaza and the West Bank as part of a fact-finding mission.

Abu-Ghazaleh was born and raised in Gaza and has been living in the United States since 1991.

—Mariam D. Arena

René Moawad Foundation Holds Banquet

The Friends of the René Moawad Foundation held their ninth annual benefit dinner May 17 at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Tysons Corner, VA, in the suburbs of Washington, DC. The Foundation was founded in Lebanon in 1990 to further the work of the former president of Lebanon, the late René Moawad, to the principles of dialogue, peace and social justice. His wife, Nayla Moawad, a member of the Lebanese parliament, heads the Foundation in Lebanon and serves as its honorary president in the United States, where it was established in 1993. The annual benefit gala dinner raises funds from a silent auction, raffle and other activities to finance the Foundation’s development projects helping the Lebanese people help themselves.

Master of Ceremonies John P. Moses recognized Dr. Edward D. Soma, the Moawad Foundation’s president, who is working to open a St Jude’s Children’s Hospital in Lebanon. Moses also called for a moment of silence in remembrance of the former president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Dr. Hala Maksoud, who was honored at the last banquet for her dedication to peace and justice. This year’s honoree was Ambassador of Ecuador to the United States Yvonne A-Baki.

Nayla Moawad addressed the challenging situation in Lebanon today. The growing national debt, she said, threatens the stability of Lebanon. At the same time, there is a cry-ing need to address social problems, unemployment, training of youth, and human development in order to bring hope for the future of Lebanon. Calling on Lebanese Americans to help now to prevent another conflict in Lebanon, Moawad emphasized, “The future of that great country is linked to seven million Lebanese living abroad.”

She asked Lebanese in the U.S. and at home to celebrate the diversity of their society and live and practice tolerance, instead of just preaching. She called upon Americans, especially policymakers in Washington, DC, to help end the suffering of people, regardless of their religion, in Lebanon and the entire region, especially in Palestine and Israel.

—Delinda C. Hanley