Response to President Erdogan of Turkey

Two days ago Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan publicly announced that women are lesser than men and cannot be treated equally. He accused feminists of rejecting motherhood. He based his statement on the Muslim belief, according to him, that women are meant for motherhood and childbearing and outside of these roles, their subservience to men is mandatory. He claimed that western women, feminists, liberal thinkers, have no idea about the true role of women and that modern ideas are creeping in to corrupt women of the Islamic faith, distort their belief6, and weaken Islam.

Interesting comments from one whose own faith lauds and praises certain women of Islam who apparently didn’t follow the role of motherhood. Mohammed’s first wife, Khadija, was a merchant, the bread-winner, without whose support Mohammed may not have had the courage to continue his spiritual mission. She was also childless. One other of Mohammed’s wives, his last and historically considered his favourite wife was Ayesha. At age six she captivated the aging prophet, at age nine, she officially ‘married’ him. Did she ever bear children, experience motherhood? According to all known records this never happened. Rather, after the prophet’s death she focused her attentions in a decidedly ‘non-motherly’ direction, warfare, conquest, and the defeat of her declared Muslim enemies. Her most particular sworn enemy was Ali, son-in-law to Mohammed and last of the first four Caliphs after Mohammed.

Ayesha led her armies in battle, the most famous of which is remembered as The Battle of the Camel. Although she suffered defeat by Ali’s forces, this did not prevent her from continuing her campaigns against him. Today, the memories of both Ayesha and Khadija remain as icons of the Islamic faith; their names favoured among parents, yet both took leadership roles and remained childless.

The question now can be asked of men such as Mr Erdogan and others like him whose firmly entrenched beliefs that women are inferior creatures is what do they fear? Do they cringe at the thought of women with power outside of the home? For more than the 1500 or so years since Islam came into being and the over 2000 years of Christianity, men have taken complete control of politics, economics, and all other aspects that move civilization. We look around us to see nothing but horrific messes, murders, wars, economic failures, and crimes of unspeakable nature and still allow men to dictate that women should not have roles outside the home. Though this thought is now more cliché than original, would it not be more appropriate to incorporate the largest percentage of the world’s population into everyday running of international affairs. We couldn’t be worse off than we already are.

An interesting side note to Mr Erdogan’s diatribe. When I visited the capital city of Turkey Ankara and its wonderful Turkish National Museum, I enjoyed a particular interest of mine, the ancient Hittite civilization. The Hittites were a very influential ancient civilization and covered a large part of what is now Turkey, parts of Syria, and into Iraq. Mr Erdogan needs to revisit this exhibit as a majority of the artifacts from the Hittites were icons and images dedicated to the female image. The icon worshipped by ancient tribes, not just as mother and wife, but as goddess, leader, communicators with the gods, and decision makers for their peoples. If these ancient civilizations were matriarchal, it appears they recognized the importance of women not just as mothers, but as equals.

Egypt’s Road to Democracy?

A friend sent me an article on Egypt’s latest crisis the other day. She knew I’d be interested in the latest verbal attacks directed at the country. After reading the article, I’ve become more convinced that the news we receive regarding the Middle East is incredibly skewed, we have no chance of really understanding the political, social, and religious climate so pervasive and controversial.

The article EGYPT: The Return to Authoritarianism and the Crisis of Citizenship Rights by Moataz El Fegiery of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies - October 2014,[ARAB CITIZENSHIP REVIEW No. 6] gives the reader an impression of a return to the complete totalitarian regime fostered for 30 years by Hosni Mubarak. The writer’s remarks subtly imply that the Sisi government is doing everything in its power to undermine any steps toward democracy and the accompanying freedoms.

But on closer examination the evidence reveals and almost sinister bias toward the Muslim Brotherhood and all their accompanying policies. Mr Fegiery is quick to bring home sins of repression to the Sisi government while completely ignoring the past repressions under Mr Morsi’s short-lived presidency. These particularly refer to the repression of women’s rights as Mr Morsi unilaterally revoked a woman’s right to travel without her husband’s permission, he re-legalized FGM, one of the worst indignities against women, and in a humiliating move, removed a woman’s right to inaugurate divorce proceedings. These actions were done without any Parliamentary accord as Morsi also refused to call for general elections, another accusation levelled at Sisi.

Whether or not the general elections promised by Sisi will happen by year’s end, and whether or not representation will be equitable in a new Parliament, is yet to be seen. But it must be remembered that Sisi operates under severely dysfunctional conditions as Egypt continues to reel under a series of changes, none of which have improved the economic, social, or political stability so desired by most Egyptians.

Jerusalem Today – Murder in a Synagogue

Jerusalem Today – Murder in a Synagogue

The brutal murder of four Israelis praying in an East Jerusalem synagogue and the subsequent death of an Israeli policeman earlier this week is as dangerous and brutal as the actions taken by Da’ish [ISIS]. As I listened to the educated debate on the PBS News Hour with Judy Woodruff discussing this situation with Dennis Ross from the Washington Bureau for Near East Policy and Professor Shibley Telhami from the University of Maryland, I noticed a glaring omission in the interview. Both men agreed that the actions were reprehensible, while Ms Woodruff drove the point by asking where these actions might lead. Is this only the tip of a third Intifada and can an outright condemnation by Palestinian President Abbas hold back the ongoing situation?

Both men spoke quite freely, although with varying degrees of disagreement. Professor Telhami believes that President Abbas is a virtual shadow, his words going unheeded; therefore what he says is not listened to by the majority of Palestinians therefore he has little power to stop the brutality. Actions like these murders, Telhami asserts, are imbedded in the Palestinian psyche as a result of the past 60 plus years of mistreatment at Israeli hands. Mr Ross disagreed by stating that Abbas, though he condemned today’s actions, continued the basic problem, demonizing Israelis in general thereby creating an atmosphere for Palestinians to continue acts of violence. But one point neither man addressed, and that was Mr Netanyahu’s response to the situation. Not only did he condemn the Palestinians, applauding the fact that both terrorists were killed, he continued his diatribe saying that the families should be arrested and their homes torn down, burned if necessary, which threat he in fact had carried out the very next day. Families were arrested, their homes demolished and burned to ashes. Is this not also an act of demonization which Mr Ross pointedly remarked was what Palestinian radio and TV continue to spout?

Vitriol such as Mr Netanyahu’s comments will never lead to a change in relations between the Israelis and Palestinians; they will merely increase misunderstanding, ill-will, and multiply acts of terror by both sides. Interestingly enough, at the interview’s conclusion a bare mention arose that these despicable murders were in retaliation to the hanging death of a Palestinian bus driver in East Jerusalem which the Israeli police determined as suicide. The world didn’t hear about this death, no global action or comments were elicited. Is it a cover-up with the two incidents completely isolated, or is this an act, a horrific act indeed, but in retaliation to a perceived lack of justice and demonization by both sides? It appears that the process of demonization is a two-way street; Near East observers must be careful to suspect both sides in this ongoing, terrible conflict.

The latest Da’ish murder

The latest Da’ish murder

Our world just witnessed the latest horrific murder committed by the terrorist jihadist group who would like to be known as ISIS. But why do we show this murderous group such respect. I blogged last week that the foreign minister of one of our allies, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nayan stated categorically in front of a UN Security Council meeting that he encourages all to give this ‘gang’ of thugs the Arabic abbreviation Da’ish. They hate this acronym, and demand the name Islamic State or IS. But as Sheikh Abdullah says, why should we show them this sort of respect? They are not a recognized Islamic State, they are respecters of none who go against them, and as we saw today, in the murder of Peter Kassig, an aid worker who chose to dedicate his young life to Syrians in need, ISIS deserves global contempt, not respect. Let us change tactics, refuse to give political or moral recognition to these jihadists, and call them Da’ish.

I lived in the UAE for many years, taught at the UAE University where most of my students were Emiratis. One former student, one for whom I have great respect, sent this reply upon being asked about the Emirati reaction to Da’ish:

‘As for ISIS, the reaction from the government was clear with their aerial engagement and the statement by the Minister of Foreign Affairs. He refused to recognize the name "Islamic State" and called on others to simply call them "Da'ish" (abbreviation in Arabic) - something that ISIS members despise. 

It is important to understand that as Arabs and Muslims, there has always been a longing for a union of Arab and Muslim states to create a super-state caliphate - a romance of the past empires. It is also a dream for Muslims abroad and hence the flock of foreign Muslim fighters. This is why groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda in the early 90's, and ISIS are successful in gathering support. However, this longing has made supporters blind to all aspects, issues, and discrepancies that follow with such groups and organizations.  

Though I can't speak for every individual here in the UAE, I can however say that after speaking to many of my Emirati colleagues and friends, generally, there has been no sympathy for ISIS's cause. Their methods completely contradict the values that we believe are of "The State" they wish to create. There is an understanding that these groups and events are the cause of political interventions, misguided funding of Syrian rebels, as well as legitimate concerns of the Iraqi population. 

I've been following ISIS very closely with interest since I first found out about their serious military capabilities and how they have become an authority in western Iraq (acquiring tanks & such) early in the year. My first impressions were that they were going to be successful in walking into Baghdad; however, when I heard (and saw) the brutality that they inflict on others, I knew there would be a significant resistance. The international and Arab alliance against this group clearly shows that there is no place for such groups in the world today.’

We in the West outside the reach of these jihadists should be thankful that most Arabs and Muslims too despise the actions of this group and that these countries in general choose to support us in our fight against Da’ish.

Sunni – Shi’a Strife

The complexities between Sunni and Shi’a Islam date back to the assassination in 661 CE of the fourth Caliph Ali, son-in-law and cousin to Mohammed.[1] From its inception to the present day, Islamic expansion has not been a comfortable experience. Fraught with dissension among the various Arab tribes conversion to Islam continued through violent jihad, assassinations, and extreme takeovers. So it should come as no surprise that this latest terrorist ‘gang’ as so aptly named by the UAE’s Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdulla bin Zayed al Nahyan, is expanding its agenda through the most severe acts of brutality.[2]

This of course frightens the global community, as we have seen how ISIS [Da’ish] prefers to achieve its goals – through vicious murders, annihilation of all groups who thwart their ‘laws’, and other forms of torture. ISIS [Da’ish] was created in 2003 by a radicalized high school dropout named al-Zarqawi, whose goal was to create a new Sunni Muslim Caliphate across the Islamic world. Though subsequently killed in a US airstrike in Iraq, his successor Abu Ayyub al-Masri – also killed in a raid on his house in Iraq in 2010, was replaced by a man calling himself Abu Bakr al–Bahgdadi. This organization, almost brought to extinction but revived dramatically since the Syrian civil war through brainwashing, terror, and fanaticism has an agenda for which its followers, male and female, are prepared to die. But not until the very recent atrocities affecting the West has their organization been brought to general worldwide attention, although known in political and military circles. I was first made aware of this organization by my Egyptian friends, who watched ISIS [Da’ish] come into being with much trepidation.

We know from the news this is one of the most horrific terrorist organizations to date, outdoing Al Qaeda in its quest for supremacy so much so that the Iraqi branch of Al Qaeda rejects ISIS [Da’ish]. Its goal is to establish an Islamic State eventually incorporating all Middle Eastern – Muslim – countries in which all must submit to the principles of Sunni Islam as set down and interpreted by ISIS [Da’ish]. Some members of this organization even go so far as to suggest that all humanity must acquiesce to its rule. This is a vision for many thrusting back to the earliest Caliphates of the 7^th century CE, a romanticized vision of a globalized Islamic Caliphate. This romantic aura lures young, radicalized Muslim men and women to the cause, the establishment of this Islamic Caliphate.

See the next instalment for the first in a series on the early Arab world and the various phases which led to the first Caliphates with ensuing centuries of rivalry, blood feuds, and theological disparities splitting Muslims into Sunni and Shi’a.

---

[1] All dates are given in Western [Gregorian] calendar. Dates in Islamic calendar [AH] begin in 622 CE – the date of Mohammed’s emigration from Mecca to Medina – known as the Hejira.

[2] This is not to say that most Muslims follow their faith through the tenets initially laid down by the prophet Mohammed in the 5 Pillars of Islam. To these sincere worshipers the violence is a travesty and scourge on their faith.