Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, March 2000, Pages 90-99

Waging Peace

CPAP and Partners for Peace Hold Media Workshop

On Oct. 18, 1999, the Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine and Partners for Peace co-hosted a half-day workshop for non-profit groups on ways to better utilize the media. The workshop included presentations by journalists, experts, and activists whose organizations led successful media campaigns.

After participants in the workshop introduced themselves, Henry Griggs (author of Strategic Communications for Non-Profits) led off the workshop. Griggs shared a concern that, too often, non-profits aren’t getting the word out to the mainstream but rather are just talking to each other. “The progressive world has convinced itself” that the media are not worth it, Griggs said, but “I don’t think you will reach your policy goals unless you affect public opinion.” Peter Wirth of GW Associates agreed with this perspective. Wirth referred to the importance of shaping public opinion and reaching the average person in order to bring about change.

Regarding how to influence the media, the speakers emphasized the importance of persistence. Griggs referred to the need for a “well-crafted message that you repeat day after day.” Jim Anderson, Washington correspondent for the German News Agency, told the audience, “don’t let anything get by” but respond to the news when it appears inaccurate. Ted Clark of National Public Radio said that Middle East coverage “has suffered from a lack of information about the Arab world.”

Yet, he said, especially in the past three to four years, Arabs and Muslims have been more active in presenting their viewpoints. “If we only present the Israeli side, we hear about it,” he said. He referred to Chicago activist Ali Abunimeh, who has been outspoken in this regard. Clark said this demonstrates that one person with good information, including international law and solid historical evidence, can make a difference. Clark added that knee-jerk responses aren’t useful, but well-crafted responses are.

Jerri Bird (Partners for Peace) and Khalid Turaani (American Muslims for Jerusalem) spoke of persistence with their media campaigns to end torture in Israel (Bird) and to close a Burger King franchise in an Israeli settlement (Turaani). Bird spoke of the need to develop a careful plan of procedure. Partners for Peace focused on the public, the administration and Congress. In order to convince the latter two, the public first needed to get aboard. This involved “media, media, media,” said Bird.

Turaani referred to his organization “doing its homework” first—making sure its research was in order. AMJ then presented the information factually and unemotionally in a letter to Burger King. AMJ, supported by other Arab-American and Muslim-American groups, continued to write letters and contact Burger King by phone until they got their point across.

The speakers also referred to the need to develop relationships and trust with individual reporters. Anderson said that it is crucial to answer phone calls from reporters as soon as possible, particularly on breaking stories. He also stressed building trust through informal contact. Griggs added that activists can maintain contact with journalists through monitoring coverage and sending the occasional news clipping, cartoon, or newsletter to the reporter with a short note. Wirth pointed out that groups also can get their points across through anecdotes and personal experiences of individual activists.

—Wendy Lehman

Pakistani-American Groups Examine Future of Democracy in Pakistan

The Council of Pakistani-American Organizations, in conjunction with the Pakistani Students Association of George Washington University in Washington, DC, and the Pakistan United Front of America, presented a Nov. 15 forum entitled “The crisis of democracy and future of Pakistan.” Professor Yameen Zubairi, president of the Pakistan Foundation of America; Dr. Nisar Chaudhry, president of the Pak-American League; Ambassador Howard Schaeffer, a South Asia specialist; and Mowahid Shah, a Washington, DC attorney, addressed issues facing Pakistan in the aftermath of the recent coup.

Dr. Zubairi noted that Pakistan has a fragile democracy without a firm foundation. No more than 20 percent of the population votes, and government is controlled by an oligarchy of fewer than 100 families. “Democracy,” he said, is nothing but a euphemism for plundering wealth and for foreign involvement. The oligarchy sees Pakistan as its personal property. Nevertheless, the idea of democratic government should not be abandoned, but should be allowed to return and thrive. For this to occur, there must be a solution to the country’s underlying problems and a minimum level of stability and security.

The situation that Pakistan faces is not entirely of its own making, Zubairi said. Other forces, both internal and external, have played a role in events leading to the current upheaval. Zubairi listed five such forces in particular. The first is Pakistan’s feudal culture, resulting in the lack of a general land reform program and the non-application of the law to the feudal class. The second is Pakistan’s brain drain and the flight of capital. Banks, he said, are playing havoc with the country by withholding money from Pakistan. The third factor is Pakistan’s “insurmountable” debts. With an income of $10 billion, Pakistan owes over $34 billion. The high interest payments leave the country open to foreign intervention, robbing the Pakistani people of their dignity. The fourth factor is foreign interests that force Pakistan to adopt policies that are against Pakistan’s interests. If foreign friends left Pakistan alone—for example, not asking it to fight proxy wars—the country could develop its democratic institutions, Zubairi said. The fifth factor is the country’s economic czars, who failed because they followed programs provided by international lending agencies without looking at Pakistan’s domestic needs.

Until these issues are dealt with, Zubairi stated forcefully, democracy does not have a chance in Pakistan, now or in the future.

Reviewing the U.S.-Pakistani relationship, Ambassador Schaeffer noted that serious U.S. interest in the development of Pakistan’s democracy is relatively new. For most of the time, the U.S. interest was to control the Soviet Union and China. The closest periods of U.S.-Pakistani relations were therefore during the periods of military leadership of Pakistan, Schaeffer said. The U.S. did not seek to discourage democracy, nor did it laud authoritarian rule in Pakistan, but it could and did do business with military regimes in a congenial way.

Schaeffer said that President Jimmy Carter had real problems with the authoritarian rule of Gen. Zia ul-Haq but, following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Carter and, later, President Ronald Reagan were ready to avert their eyes from Zia’s practices in what had become a “front-line” state. Whereas previously the emphasis was on human rights, in the 1990s U.S. support for democracy has become a more central point of U.S. foreign policy, and the U.S. watches what happens after elections.

The four Pakistani governments since 1988, Schaeffer noted, epitomized “illiberal democracy”: elections were held but the people’s rights were limited, and in all four governments the military played a notable role. There is currently a recognition in the U.S. government that democracy is not only for rich countries with a literate populace, but that it is the best system for all, everywhere, Schaeffer said. The U.S. Congress and administration have been disappointed by General Musharraf’s resistance to the U.S. call for a timetable for the re-establishment of democracy in Pakistan. He said that Pakistan’s problems are deep-rooted, but if the new government follows its rhetoric, it could build a stronger base for democracy than has existed previously.

Dr. Chaudhry recalled that Pakistan’s decision to become a front-line state in the fight to expel Soviet troops from Afghanistan was one of the phenomena that led to the Soviet Union’s breakup. “Then what happened?” he asked rhetorically.

Chaudhry stated that the U.S. should accept responsibility for some of the problems in the region, having abandoned both Pakistan and Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawal.

Chaudhry also noted that Pakistan has generally been run by autocratic people, whether they were military or “democratically elected kings.” In the absence of any solid governmental institutions, he said, the problems facing Pakistan are massive, as are the dangers in facing them.

Pakistan is called an ally of the U.S., but the ally needs economic and political help that the U.S. has been slow to provide, Chaudhry continued. If the U.S. is interested in building democracy in Pakistan, the U.S. should help rather than punish Pakistan. There is a need for loans if the U.S. does not want Pakistan’s economy to collapse, Chaudhry concluded, adding that it is time for the U.S. to engage more fully in the region and see that Pakistan gains secure borders.

Mr. Shah began his presentation by noting that there is the challenge of due process. Despite a demand for quick action to bring Pakistan’s former rulers to answer, due process is still on the books and this matter would drag on for some time, slowing the current government’s aim of reform.

While misrule contributed to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s downfall, it was mainly due to his lack of a relationship with the army head, Shah said. He also noted that the current euphoria at the exit of Sharif’s government could backfire for Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who will be pressured to deliver major changes. Shah said that he hoped that reform does not degenerate into vendetta and revenge.

Saying that the problems facing Pakistan are not only in the government, but exist in the society as a whole, Shah identified six main problems. There is pretorianism, the tendency of the military to step in. There is also the issue of dynastic power, concentrated in the hands of a few, with opportunities dispensed for and by the few. In the U.S., the middle class anchors democracy. But a middle class is almost totally lacking in Pakistan. There is also an emphasis on form over substance, with its focus on display rather than the nuts and bolts of the work ethic. Shah said Pakistan also lacks the tradition of “live and let live,” which does not exist between governments or even between people in Pakistan. The idea of “America” is also a factor. In the 1960s and 1970s, the U.S. was seen as the cause of all evil. Today, the U.S. is viewed as a messiah and savior. The U.S. is now a prop, with Pakistani leaders not willing to make internal changes, but looking for a quick fix from the U.S. Finally, Shah listed several problems of governance that have not yet been tackled, such as overpopulation, economic implosion, unemployment, and literacy.

Shah said the new government needs to galvanize the people, both as individuals and as a group, and give the Pakistani people a sense of belonging. While Shah said he has hopes for the future, he noted wryly that whenever a new Pakistani government takes over, the sweets-makers have a field day. Then when that self-same government exits, the sweets-makers again have a field day.

—Hugh S. Galford

William Quandt Speaks at Woodrow Wilson Center

Dr. William Quandt, professor of government and foreign affairs at the University of Virginia, and White House Middle East adviser at the time of the Camp David negotiations, discussed Arab-Israeli peace prospects Nov. 8 at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, DC.

Quandt, author of a number of books on U.S. involvement in Middle East affairs, began by enumerating several positives for the peace process: the clear defeat of Binyamin Netanyahu and the Likud party; the Sharm el-Sheikh memorandum, with its new time line for the implementation of outstanding provisions of various interim agreements and for achieving a permanent settlement; the political appeal and personal ties President Bill Clinton has formed with both Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian President Yasser Arafat; and the bipartisan support in the United States for a Middle East peace.

On the negative side, Quandt continued, is Clinton’s inability to secure congressional funding for Middle East initiatives, a more relaxed U.S. role, and Prime Minister Barak’s firm stance against the return to 1967 borders, the dismantlement of Jewish settlements, and the return of Palestinian refugees.

According to Quandt, there is a good possibility of a framework agreement emerging in February and the tacit recognition of a Palestinian state by Barak. At the same time, Quandt continued, harder questions will follow, including the attributes of the state and what to do about settlements.

In determining the territorial make-up of a future Palestinian state, the issues of territorial contiguity, percentages of the West Bank and Gaza from which Israel will withdraw, and relations to Arab neighbors have to be at the core of the process, Quandt said. The Israeli government also has to find a viable solution to the problem of the 160,000 settlers presently living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

According to Quandt, Israelis can follow three possible strategies: the Sinai precedent, in which settlers are evacuated from land returned to Palestinians; re-groupment of settlements in such a way that settlements fall within Israel’s borders; or sovereignty by the Palestinian Authority over settlers who choose to remain on land returned to the Palestinians, a formula for renewed tension, according to Quandt.

—Sadia Razaq

“In Retrospect: Images in Clay” by Maida Al-Hussaini

Iraqi-American artist Maida Al-Hussaini showed her sculptural ceramics, wall hangings and calligraphy at a fascinating exhibit entitled “In Retrospect: Images in Clay” from Nov. 26 to 28 at the Sheraton Premiere at Tyson’s Corner in the Washington, DC suburbs. A self-taught artist, Al-Hussaini’s ceramics offer a vision of the vibrant Islamic past through contemporary eyes.

Al-Hussaini grew up in Iraq, where many homes had wall hangings made of ceramics, wood, glass or tapestry with religious inscriptions. “I decided to design and create my own wall hangings and called them ‘icons’ because they represent religious script and symbols,” Al Hussaini told the Washington Report. “Rather than a few words, the main piece is inscribed with a meaningful phrase and the wall hanging is arranged so that words trail down from the main piece forming shorter vertical phrases…I used mirrors in most of the ceramic pieces to create reflections with the changes of light. Some pieces I accentuated with gold…In Iraqi culture, you will find blue or turquoise ceramic that we call the ‘seven eyes.’ These ceramics are thought to ward off the envious eyes and the evil spirit. I could not resist adding these pieces to my collection, improvising on them a little to give them more charm.”

The combination of Arabic calligraphy, folklore and scenes portraying life as she remembers it growing up in Iraq are delightful. Three colors are predominant: cream, blue and tarnished green. “Cream, my favorite color, represents purity and tranquillity, and gives my pieces a sense of serenity,” Al-Hussaini said. “Bright blue, in my culture, is the color of hope. Whether in North Africa, the Middle East or the Arabian Peninsula, blue is everywhere: on buildings, jewelry, tapestries, glass and pottery. Tarnished green is the color of faith and life. It is the color I primarily associate with Iraq. I could not help but call it Mesopotamian green.”

The works presented in this exhibit are “my way of paying homage to the land and culture that gave me so much and made me who I am today,” Maida Al-Hussaini explains. “I tried to be as true to my culture and tradition as possible. People familiar with Arabic culture and Islamic art will catch a glimpse of the past and the present through my work. As for the others, I hope they will consider my art a window through which they can view the grace and elegance of Islamic art and become familiar with a culture that is so rich and colorful, as well as a tradition that is so old, yet still powerful and beautiful.” Maida Al-Hussaini can be reached at (703) 503-9390.

—Delinda C. Hanley

Georgetown Examines Turkish Earthquake’s Political Fallout

Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies and the Institute of Turkish Studies sponsored an Oct. 27 forum analyzing the August 1999 earthquake in Turkey. Georgetown associate professor Dr. Scott Redford, who was in Turkey at the time of the quake, began the forum by describing events immediately afterward.

He said it took a while for realization of the earthquake’s magnitude to set in, as the area’s infrastructure was so severely damaged that there was limited access to the sites of the quake. The media, however, flew helicopters over the damaged areas, providing the Turkish public with astounding pictures of the damage. When Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit removed four local governors, the press had a field day, vilifying contractors for poor construction practices.

The earthquake also resulted in increased involvement by private citizens and underlined the importance of new forms of technology. People with cell phones called radio stations, describing what they could see in front of them. Others with video cameras provided their footage to the TV news. Personal connections came into play with these videos: if a video was aired on the news, help was sent to that city. The Internet also was a means of communication and news, with Web sites listing the names of the dead. Such personal initiatives surpassed any state response.

Prof. Sabri Sayari, executive director of the Georgetown Institute for Turkish Studies, then discussed political implications of the earthquake. In its aftermath, people asked why, when 90 percent of Turkey lies in earthquake zones, the government was not at all prepared. The government had no plan for civil defense, and for the first day after the quake the government’s attitude was business as usual, with ministers and parliamentarians discussing social security reform. The quake also exposed the extent of the naked corruption in municipal government, with payments made to municipal officials in return for not enforcing construction codes.

The vacuum left by the government’s inability to respond effectively was filled by voluntary groups. A good deal of this effort was led by Islamist organizations that provided such basic necessities as soup kitchens, blankets and temporary shelter. Instead of welcoming this needed relief, authorities hampered it. This intensified resentment among the public, who felt that the government didn’t do much for them and tried to clamp down on those who did.

Another area of major change was in Turks’ views of foreigners. In the 1990s, Sayari said, Turkey has witnessed a rising tide of nationalism, fueled by a widespread perception that Turkey is surrounded by enemies. When the quake led to an outpouring of help, aid and sympathy from around the world, Turkish attitudes toward foreigners—especially the Greeks—changed significantly. This will have an impact on foreign relations in the near future, according to Sayari.

Catherine Stevens, a member of the World Bank team sent to Turkey in the week following the disaster, said the extensive damage was caused by the strength and duration of the quake, poor construction techniques and oversight, and liquefaction of the soil. In Degirmendere, the land dropped 17 meters, and it is believed that the land dropped 25 meters under the Sea of Marmara. Severe damage occurred to the communications system, the electric power grid, and the main motorway between Istanbul and Ankara. Given such widespread damage, compounded by the quake’s hitting in the middle of the night, Turkey’s disaster response system was simply overwhelmed.

Areas affected by the earthquake account for roughly 7 percent of Turkey’s GNP. Many industrial enterprises withstood the quake well—one notable exception being the Tüpras refinery—but it is estimated that fully 50 percent of the area’s small- to medium-sized enterprises will be permanently lost. The area’s popularity as a tourist destination will probably suffer as well. The challenges facing Turkey are daunting: housing, hospitals, schools, and industry all need to be rebuilt, with tighter controls on construction practices. The immediate damage assessment has been preliminarily set at $3 billion to $6.5 billion (1.5 to 3.3 percent of GNP), with secondary effects imposing an additional estimated burden of $3.6 billion to $4.6 billion over 1999-2000.

—Hugh S. Galford

Alon Ben Meir Speaks at Middle East Institute

Dr. Alon Ben Meir, who teaches at the New School for Social Research in New York City is Middle East project director for the World Policy Institute, spoke Jan. 12 at the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC. He provided Israeli perspectives on negotiations with Syria. Interestingly, when asked whether he believed Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak really was prepared to withdraw Israeli forces to the June 4, 1967 border with Syria, the sine qua non of the Syrian position, Ben Meir said probably not.

Yet, according to the Israeli press, it was Barak’s assurance to President Bill Clinton that he was willing to withdraw Israeli forces to that line, which Clinton then passed on to Syrian President Hafez Al-Assad, that elicited Syrian agreement to resume the talks, broken off after the 1995 assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. In postponing further talks in January, Syria cited as the reason Barak’s unwillingness to state publicly what he allegedly promised Clinton privately.

Ben Meir said the Israeli dilemma is how to reconcile the problem of territorial withdrawals with the problem of security. The Israeli public has been conditioned to believe that “Golan is critically important to Israeli national security,” he said. But, “if Syria is willing to offer a ‘real peace’ the argument no longer has a strong basis.” He continued, “the Israelis want a peace of reconciliation between the Israeli people and the Syrian people.”

Ben Meir said the Syrians “have long since come to the conclusion that there is only one major player—the United States. Therefore Syria must open channels to the United States and normalize relations.” He noted also that “the Syrians have adhered to every detail in the agreement negotiated in 1974” (Sinai II).

Ben Meir said the difference between the 1967 border upon which the Syrians insist, and the 1923 border which the Israelis prefer, is between 7 and 11 square miles. But control of those few square miles carries with it access not only to the waters of the Sea of Galilee but also of tributaries of vital importance to Syria, Jordan and Israel.

“I have not found one Israeli who says we are not prepared to share,” Ben Meir continued. “Israel and Syria must both have equal say in the division of waters.”

Ben Meir was dismissive of Israeli plans to leave Jewish settlers in place after Israeli withdrawal from Golan. “In my view these settlers have rendered great service by settling there in the front lines,” Ben Meir said. “But like good soldiers, the settlers will have to go home.”

Regarding the American role, Ben Meir speculated that whether the Americans are present or absent, the agreement reached eventually will probably be about the same. The Americans are needed, he said, because “neither Syria nor Israel are willing to make an agreement without military and economic aid from the U.S.”

As for other issues, he said, Assad must be able to say “we have recovered every single inch” of territory, and he will expect the U.S. and Israel to recognize Syria’s special role in Lebanon. For their part the Israelis “don’t want the Syrians to just walk away from Lebanon without securing the Israeli-Lebanese border.”

Ben Meir concluded with the admonition frequently heard from other friends of Israel in the U.S. media that “making peace between Israel and Syria is going to be financially costly [to the U.S.] but it is the best investment the U.S. can make, considering the potential benefits to the U.S. of peace.”

—Richard H. Curtiss

Friends, Admirers Turn Out for Alfred Lilienthal 85th Birthday Observance

Some 450 friends, fans, colleagues and relatives from all over the United States turned out in November to observe the 85th birthday of pioneer anti-Zionist writer and lecturer Dr. Alfred Lilienthal. The birthday observance was hosted at the University Club in Washington, DC, by American Near East Refugee Aid (ANERA), under whose auspices Dr. Lilienthal has set up a scholarship fund to help Palestinian youths from the refugee camps continue educations interrupted during the intifada and West Bank and Gaza closures.

Master of ceremonies for the gala event, which was a repeat of an 80th birthday party held at the University Club for Dr. Lilienthal in 1994, was Dr. Jack Shaheen, author of The TV Arab and numerous articles about the media and the image of Arabs in America. Speakers highlighted periods in Dr. Lilienthal’s life, from his youth in New York, his World War II service in Cairo, and his attendance at the founding conference of the United Nations in San Francisco in 1944.

A highlight of the dinner event was a reading by actor friends of the honoree of passages from his as-yet-unproduced play about a young Jewish intellectual of the post-World War II period who seeks to explain to life-long friends from student days why the establishment of Israel on land taken from a Middle Eastern people as compensation for the crimes committed against Jews in Europe is such a grievous mistake, and how badly it will harm American interests throughout the world. Some of the protagonists agree in private, but decline to join his public crusade to undo the partition of Palestine because of the harm it would do to personal careers, friendships, and even family relationships.

Dr. Lilienthal’s own larger-than-life adventures are reflected throughout his play. In 1946 he published an article entitled “Israel’s Flag Is Not Mine” in the Reader’s Digest, which had the largest circulation in the United States and which then did not accept commercial advertising, meaning it could not be silenced or muffled through commercial pressure. The article was the first widely read critique of what U.S. President Harry Truman was doing through pressure on war-devastated United Nations members to carve out a Jewish state in the midst of the Arab world, and on land that had been overwhelmingly Palestinian until a few years earlier.

The article, which was widely reprinted and discussed throughout the world, was followed by three books in quick succession: What Price Israel, There Goes the Middle East and The Other Side of the Coin. During the period Dr. Lilienthal was publishing his books, and fighting a losing battle with publishers and book distributors to keep them in print and on bookstore and library shelves, he also published a newsletter, Middle East in Focus , which detailed his travels to Middle Eastern countries, lectures and symposia in which he participated. Around the time he discontinued the newsletter, he brought out his final monumental book, The Zionist Connection II , which is, in effect, a recapitulation, and expansion of his previous works.

Dr. Lilienthal for many years maintained an office in mid-town Manhattan. In the early 1980s, after the death of his mother in New York, he moved to Washington, where he works from his apartment near George Washington University and the Department of State. Although he has been dogged by ill health in recent years, he remains a familiar figure at Middle East-related events in the U.S. national capital.

—Richard H. Curtiss

Afghanistan Examined at MEI

Former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst Julie Sirrs, now with Response International, a non-governmental organization, discussed the influences on the ruling Taliban regime in Afghanistan at the Middle East Institute on Jan. 5.

According to Sirrs, Saudi political dissident Osama bin Laden, currently under the protection of the Taliban, serves as a powerful symbol of the anti-Western sentiment galvanizing support for the Afghan regime. In addition, Sirrs pointed to the instrumental support Bin Laden provides for the Taliban in the ongoing Afghan civil war; some 700 of Bin Laden’s highly trained and equipped fighters directly participate in the fight against the opposition United Front.

In addition, Bin Laden has helped the Taliban financially from his personal assets, estimated to be somewhere between $7 million and $1 billion, and from donations he extracts from wealthy Arab Gulf states. Even with sanctions in place, Sirrs noted, the net benefit to the Taliban of allowing Osama bin Laden to remain in Afghanistan is tremendous.

In discussing outside influences on current Afghan politics, Sirrs focused on Iran and Pakistan. She said Iran views Afghanistan as a national security issue in view of the nearly one million Afghani refugees in Iran and the increasing violence associated with the flow of drug trafficking in Afghanistan.

Sirrs said there is also a perception within Iran that the United States and the Taliban are connected in an effort to overthrow the Iranian government. According to Sirrs, the Iranians believe that since the Taliban rose to prominence in mid-1995, at the same time the U.S. Congress voiced its desire to fund the removal of the Iranian government, the U.S. is aiding Pakistan in funding and arming the Taliban as a proxy to cause unrest in Iran.

In response to this perceived threat, Sirrs explained, Iran has become the sole supporter of the United Front in Afghanistan, supplying it with arms, ammunition, and humanitarian assistance.

Particularly significant about the aid coming from Iran, Sirrs said, is that it is all in the form of a donation from the government. Ironically enough, Sirrs commented, Iran now is supporting the United Front in Afghanistan and finds itself in the odd position of supporting U.S. interests in the country.

Of all the foreign influences on Afghanistan, Sirrs pointed to Pakistan’s as the most significant. Unlike any other country, Sirrs said, Pakistan sends the Taliban its own citizens to partake in the fighting in the Afghan civil war. Students from madrasas in Pakistan venture into Afghanistan in cycles to serve as soldiers, with some 6,000 Pakistanis now serving in Taliban ranks. Pakistan also has provided financial, military, and logistical support for the Taliban.

—Sadia Razaq

Search for Common Ground Awards

The Ambassador of Austria and Mrs. Peter Moser hosted the Search for Common Ground awards after a buffet dinner on Dec. 16, 1999 at the Austrian Embassy. The non-profit organization established the awards to “acknowledge outstanding achievements in conflict resolution internationally and in the United States,” organizers explained in their program. A special performance by musician Richie Havens, who has sung about brotherhood and personal freedom for three decades, from stages at both Woodstock festivals to President Bill Clinton’s 1993 inauguration, warmed up the audience.

James A. Baker III, who was secretary of state under President George Bush, was given the award for international peacemaking for his key role in helping to launch the Middle East peace process. He helped set up and run the 1991 Middle East peace conference in Madrid.

Among the other awards was an award for journalism in the Middle East, sponsored by the J. Zel Lurie Fund for investigative journalism. Lurie is the former editor and publisher of Hadassah magazine and has covered the United Nations for the Jerusalem Post. The winning articles were selected “for opening windows of understanding between the two societies.”

Ethan Bronner won the English-language award for his New York Times article, “Israel’s History Textbooks Replace Myths with Facts.” His ground-breaking article examined the controversy in Israel surrounding the decision to depart from the traditional myth-building presentation of Israeli history to include the Palestinian point of view in the Israeli classroom.

The Arabic-language award was presented to Hazem Saghiyeh, a Lebanese journalist with the Arabic daily Al-Hayat in London, and Saleh Bashir, a Tunisian journalist based in Paris. Together they wrote “Universalizing the Holocaust” in Al-Hayat to highlight the importance of the Arab world understanding and acknowledging this tragedy that is so significant to the psyche of Jewish people and which in turn underlies some of the Israeli actions which Arabs find inexplicable.

Dalia Karpel received the Hebrew-language award for her Ha’aretz newspaper story “Azmi Nassar: The Miracle Worker,” which gave Israeli readers a glimpse of an important symbol to Palestinians seeking to build a nation: their winning Palestinian soccer team. Other awards were presented for bridge-building and peacemaking within South Africa, between Cuba and the United States, and a community peace-building coalition that started in inner city Boston. Presenters and speakers included Ambassador (Ret.) Alfred Atherton, Jr., who is the chairman of Search for Common Ground in the Middle East; John Marks, founder and president of SCG; and Mohammed Wahby, bureau chief and political columnist in the United States of Dar El-Hilal and Al-Mussawar.

—Delinda C. Hanley

A Musical Christmas Gift to Bethlehem

A Bethlehem 2000 project needs help raising funds for the restoration of a 19th century German-built pipe organ at Christmas Lutheran Church in Bethlehem. The organ was built 106 years ago and shipped to Bethlehem, where it served the Palestinian Christian congregation for a century. In recent years, due to lack of funds and the impact of Israeli military occupation on the struggling congregation, the organ has fallen into disrepair.

With Bethlehem no longer under direct Israeli control, under the Palestinian National Authority and with the financial assistance of many foreign governments, the city is rebuilding in preparation for visitors celebrating Bethlehem 2000 throughout and after the millennial year. Christmas Lutheran Church, led by Palestinian pastor Mitri Raheb, is an integral part of this rejuvenation. Finland has given the church a grant to build an auditorium for cultural affairs and a new school. The church’s International Center of Bethlehem, formed in 1995, already offers tourist services, trains tourist-industry workers, and promotes cultural exchanges between Palestinians and the rest of the world. Raheb says he is committed to “helping Christian visitors get to know the living Christian communities in the Holy Land. We also see Christmas Lutheran Church becoming a much-needed cultural and music center for Bethlehem.”

Members of Lutheran Church of Christ the Redeemer in Minneapolis, a sister congregation of Christmas Lutheran for the past decade, are trying to raise $130,000 to reconstruct the church’s pipe organ. Their goal is to have the organ restored and ready for dedication by Christmas 2000. The campaign is endorsed by the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Jordan, the church body to which Christmas Lutheran belongs, and the Division for Global Mission of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. To donate make your check payable to Lutheran Church of Christ the Redeemer and mail it to LCCR Organ Campaign, 5440 Penn Ave. S., Minneapolis, MN 55419. For more information contact Charles P. Lutz at (612) 861-6648 or e-mail chlutz@usinternet.com.

—Delinda C. Hanley

Journey in Watercolors with George Kosinski

Jerusalem-based artist George Kosinski’s Fall 1999 tour of the United States ended with a reception hosted by Tain and Grace Tompkins to introduce national capital-area art-lovers to this great artist and his powerful watercolors. With his traveling digital slide-show, Scottish-born Kosinski told his story that started with a trip to Israel and the Sinai in 1982. Entranced by the ancient world that he could see was being replaced or hidden by modern development, he wanted to capture the past on his canvas before it disappeared forever. Kosinski left his architectural practice in the English Lake District and moved his family in 1991 to Jerusalem, where he has lived and painted until today.

Kosinski’s paintings are portraits not only of the timeless Holy Land, with its ancient stones and religious backdrops, but also take viewers from the desert shores of the Dead Sea to Petra, the ruins of Baalbeck and Palmyra, the Krak de Chevaliers, and streets, souqs and mosques of Syria, Egypt and Jordan. Viewing his watercolor paintings displayed in the Tompkins’ home, watching his slide show, and listening to Kosinski’s personal interpretations of his paintings, made guests long to travel to the sights Kosinski had captured with deft strokes of his paintbrush.

He is compiling a limited edition fine art publication to be released in the spring of 2000 with more than 200 watercolor images, reminiscent of the works of another fine Scottish artist of the early 19th century, David Roberts. For a look at Kosinski’s paintings of the Middle East or to order a print (signed and numbered for $45, including shipping) or to order his special fine art books (from $120 to $975, depending on the edition), see his Web site, www.aquarelles.com, write for a brochure to Kosinski Studio, P.O. Box 783, Jerusalem 91007, or send an e-mail to sales@aquarelles.com. Having concluded his residence in Jerusalem, he plans to move to Santa Fe, New Mexico in April 2000 to open a new studio.

—Delinda C. Hanley

The Works of David Roberts

George D. Lintzeris, owner of Petra Fine Art in Baltimore, MD, gave an informative lecture entitled “The Works of David Roberts” on Dec. 12, 1999, hosted by the Jerusalem Fund for Education and Community Development in Washington, DC. Lintzeris talked about the adventures of the highly acclaimed Scottish 19th century landscape artist who traveled across the Sinai Peninsula to Petra, Palestine and Lebanon. Illustrating his narrative with the lithograph prints produced from Roberts’ hundreds of sketches on his travels, attendees were also given advice on identifying and collecting Roberts’ prints.

Roberts was born in 1796 to a poor shoemaker in Edinburgh, Scotland. He attended school only briefly before becoming a house painter at age 8 and eventually painting scenery for a traveling theatrical company. Early patrons included William Thackeray and Charles Dickens, who met him when he was employed at Covent Gardens and encouraged his early adventures abroad to Spain and Morocco. He was the first Western artist to travel in the Middle East without a patron or military escort. At one point he lost his sketchbook and had to retrace 80 arduous miles to retrieve it. He drew 272 elaborate sketches with a photographer’s eye for 11 months, which he then turned into 342 finished pictures when he returned home. He combined the mind of a poet with the accuracy of a draftsman to give Europe a true portrait of the religion and history of the Middle East. For more information write Petra Fine Art, P.O. Box 16321, Baltimore, MD 21210, call (410) 235-2696, or visit its Web site at www.attach.net/infocentral/petra

—Delinda Hanley

Patrick Buchanan Denounces Sanctions

Reform Party presidential candidate Patrick J. Buchanan spoke about foreign policy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, on Dec. 16, 1999. He zeroed in on the failure of U.S. sanctions to weaken the grip of hostile regimes in Iraq, Iran, Cuba or Serbia while at the same time, he said, sanctions have spread resentment against America all over the world. “In Mr. Clinton’s first term, the U.S. imposed 61 unilateral sanctions on 35 countries,” Buchanan said. “Even his own secretary of commerce, William Daley, concedes that ‘we’ve become a sanctions-happy nation.’”

Buchanan said Denis Halliday, who resigned his position as U.N. humanitarian coordinator in Iraq to protest the human suffering resulting from the sanctions on Iraq, “holds America, the principal advocate and enforcer of U.N. Security Council sanctions, responsible for the deaths of 60,000 Iraqi children every year, and of 500,000 since 1991. If his figures are correct, more Iraqi children have been lost in nine years to U.S. sanctions than all the American soldiers killed in combat in all the wars of the 20th century.

“Woodrow Wilson called sanctions the ‘peaceful, silent, deadly remedy,’” Buchanan said. “Today, they may fairly be called America’s silent weapon of mass destruction whose victims are almost always the weak, the sick, the women and the young.” Buchanan went on to say, “Sanctions impose suffering not on dictators, but on their oppressed people.” He said that as a result of sanctions, targeted regimes “ascribe all the deprivations of their people to U.S. malice and power. Their propaganda task is made easier, because the charge has truth…Our sanctions are sowing seeds of hatred that will one day flower in acts of terrorism against us, years after these sanctions expire.

“Have we not learned from our own history of British sanctions against the 13 colonies?” Buchanan asked the audience. “Embargoes do not cow people into submission, they unite people in defiance.”

Buchanan declared, “Among my first acts as president will be to declare an end to all sanctions on the sale or transfer of U.S. food, medicine, or goods essential to a decent life or a civilian economy now in force against Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Myanmar, Sudan, and all the other targeted nations of U.S. sanctions policy.” He concluded by saying, “On this eve of a new century. Let us cease to hector and discipline the world and try to lead it; let us conform our foreign policy to principles more becoming a godly nation and great republic.”

—Delinda C. Hanley

Rabbi Looks at Human Rights

“It is not enough to [only] teach and educate,” one must “also take action” when faced with injustice, said Israeli-American Rabbi Arik Ascherman on Oct. 18 at the Middle East Institute.

For the last two decades, Ascherman has been involved in Jewish-Palestinian dialogue, has lived in Israeli-Arab villages, and has worked with the homeless in the U.S. and in the Soviet Union. Now, as the executive director of Rabbis for Human Rights, his main focus is on human rights issues within Israel and the West Bank.

Rabbis for Human Rights began 11 years ago, Ascherman said, primarily as a result of a stereotype that it was “so unusual for rabbis to be concerned about human rights.” Too often, rabbis focus their energies only on specific religious laws such as dietary regulations and not on issues of justice, he said.

Ascherman referred to the vibrant peace movement in Israel but said that it was largely secular. In a context in which “internal Israeli/Jewish schisms are at least as broad as Israeli-Palestinian” differences, Ascherman said Rabbis for Human Rights wishes to create a religious voice for human rights. “We as Jews are taught that one of the central beliefs for any human being is...the repair and sanctification of the world,” he explained.

Much of the work of Rabbis for Human Rights focuses on the abuses and discrimination Palestinians and foreign workers in Israel have faced as “the victims of the ethnocentric, zenophobic” outlook in Israel. This includes the group’s work to prevent the Israeli government from demolishing Palestinian homes.

Since 1967, said Ascherman, the Israeli military has demolished 30,000 Palestinian homes, and there are an additional 6,000 standing demolition orders. In East Jerusalem and Area C of the West Bank, it is “virtually impossible for a Palestinian to obtain a legal building permit,” said Ascherman. “When they are forced to build a home, they build an illegal home which is subject to demolition.”

Rabbis for Human Rights, with other Israelis, internationals, and Palestinians, have violated military orders and rebuilt Palestinian homes that have been demolished by Israeli authorities. The rabbis have also partnered Israeli families with Palestinian families facing home demolition.

Ascherman believes that the new Israeli government may provide some improvement. There is a “new atmosphere” although “we have not seen significant change yet,” said Ascherman. Still, “there’s a feeling that there are people to talk to” in the new government. So far, the Barak government has demolished “only” three Palestinian homes, said Ascherman, but it is still handing out demolition orders. The government also continues to destroy Palestinian trees and land, perhaps at an even accelerated rate.

—Wendy Lehman

Sad Ending to Missing Israeli Arab’s Story

There is a very sad update to the story reported in the previous issue of this magazine regarding the Oct. 9 disappearance of an 21-year-old Israeli Arab Martin Zarour. Martin’s father took the article on p. 95 of the Washington Report to the local Israeli police station, whereupon the Israeli authorities brought the last caller on Martin’s cell phone, Martin’s Jewish friend who had borrowed some money from him, in for questioning. The next day Martin’s body was found in a well, with gunshots to his foot and head. Since Martin’s dental records were lost by the police department, absolute identification of his body was pending at publication date. But the police did offer an apology to Martin’s father and said they should have listened to his suspicions before. One can only speculate that had the ethnicities of the victim and the perpetrator been reversed, the Israeli police might have taken the case more seriously.

—Delinda C. Hanley

Israeli Lawyers Speak at CPAP

Two Israeli lawyers, Allegra Pacheco and Sahar Francis, both advocates of Palestinian civil and legal rights, spoke Nov. 3 at the Center for Policy Analysis in Washington, DC. The luncheon briefing was one in a series of presentations organized around the United States by Partners for Peace.

Pacheco, an American-born Israeli activist, has been involved in efforts to make Israel’s GSS internal security service stop torturing Palestinian detainees. In 1994, the Public Committee Against Torture (PCAT), founded by Pacheco, argued the unconstitutionality of the use of physical pressure before Israel’s High Court. In conjunction with efforts from PCAT, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, similar to the American Civil Liberties Union, petitioned the High Court against the use of shaking as a form of interrogation. Again in 1997, Pacheco argued against the practice of shabeh, in which a Palestinian is made to sit in a very low chair with front legs shorter than those in the rear, with his hands tied behind his back, one inside the chair’s back and one behind it.

Eventually, Pacheco’s petitions, coupled with those of another Israeli lawyer, Lea Tsemel, resulted in an Israeli High Court decision that GSS methods were in fact unconstitutional. “Although the resolution by the High Court is not without flaws,” Pacheco cautioned, “it validates the suffering of tens of thousands of Palestinians who were victims of torture practiced by the Israelis.”

In concluding, and much to the audience’s dismay, Pacheco described a prison currently being erected in Bethlehem by the Palestinian Authority. According to Pacheco, the prison is an underground facility only 10 minutes from the Israeli prison known as the Russian Compound, on which it is being modeled. “Sadly enough,” Pacheco said, “the Palestinian guards are being trained in Israel’s notorious torture methods, methods we just proved to the High Court to be inhumane and unconstitutional.”

Since Pacheco made her talk, Palestinians emerging from Israeli interrogation cells report continued and apparently uninterrupted use of torture by Israeli authorities, including at least one documented death, in defiance of the High Court Ruling (See “People Watch” on p. 54 of this issue.)

Sahar Francis, a Palestinian born in Israel, poignantly described the injustice and humiliation suffered by Palestinians at the hands of the self-proclaimed democratic Jewish state. Sahar cited the confiscation of Jerusalem ID cards and the rigorous process Palestinians have to undergo to retain permission to reside in Jerusalem. Even those born in Jerusalem can lose their residency permits if the Israeli government concludes that they have been absent from the city for a period of seven years. These practices, combined with Israeli refusal to allow Palestinians to build, expand, or even renovate existing dwellings, translate into a forced migration policy of Palestinians from Jerusalem. In addition to having their residency rights revoked, Francis concluded, Israel continues to demolish Palestinian homes at will, leaving Palestinian men, women, and children without shelter, one of the basic necessities of survival.

—Sadia Razaq