SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (48073)3/15/2005 2:47:05 AM
From: IQBAL LATIF  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 50167
 
Was he right all along?

New signs on the Arab street New Feature


Thomas L. Friedman The New York Times
Monday, March 14, 2005

WASHINGTON From Baghdad to Beirut, the Middle East has seen a series of unprecedented popular demonstrations for democracy. There were, however, two street protests in December that got virtually no coverage, but were just as important, if not more. One took place in the Egyptian Nile Delta town of Mahalla and the other in the Suez Canal city of Ismailiya. Both of these raucous Egyptian demonstrations, which involved marches, strikes, denunciations of the government and appeals to Parliament, were triggered by President Hosni Mubarak's decision to sign the first substantial trade agreement with Israel since Camp David. That decision brought Egyptian workers from both areas into the streets. They were furious. They were enraged. Why?
.
They were not included in the new trade deal with Israel.
.
Now, that's a new Middle East. On Dec. 14, Egypt, Israel and the United States signed an accord setting up three Qualified Industrial Zones in Egypt. Any Egyptian company operating in one of these zones that imports from an Israeli company at least 11.7 percent of the parts, materials or services that go into the Egyptian company's final product can then export that finished product to the U.S. duty free.
.
This is a big deal for Egypt, which, unlike Jordan and Israel, does not have a free-trade treaty with the United States. As part of the accord, the United States named Greater Cairo, Alexandria and Port Said the three Qualified Industrial Zones. It had to be limited to only three municipalities so that the United States would not be swamped with Egyptian exports - hence the protests from the two big Egyptian manufacturing centers that were left out.
.
According to Rashid Mohamed Rashid, Egypt's impressive new minister of foreign trade, 397 Egyptian companies have already signed up to participate in the Qualified Industrial Zone program, most of them small and medium-size. Many of these Egyptian companies have already gone to Israel to forge deals with Israeli suppliers or started work with Israeli partners to identify export markets in the United States. Some Israeli companies are setting up shop in the Egyptian zones to provide services right on the spot.
.
There are a lot of messages in this bottle. One is that if you create a real opportunity for Israeli and Egyptian businesses to interact profitably, not only will Egyptians ignore the protests of the old Nasserites who want to boycott Israel, they will seize the opportunity and protest mightily if they are kept out.
.
Another message: This "Baghdad spring" will not blossom into sustainable democracy in any of these Arab states without a broader middle class and civil society institutions to support it. For too long, U.S. foreign policy was based on buying stability in the Arab world by supporting dictators, who destroyed the independent press, political parties, unions, real private sector and civil society - everything except the mosque. Iraq is the starkest example of this, which is why democratization there will take time.
.
Looking at Eastern Europe on the eve of the fall of the Berlin Wall, said Emanuele Ottolenghi, a lecturer on the Middle East at Oxford, "we could have predicted which countries would have an easy transition to democracy and which ones not." Countries like Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and the Baltic states, which had a history of liberal institutions and free markets that had been suppressed by Communism, quickly flourished. Others farther east, which were starting from scratch - Bulgaria, Romania and the former Soviet republics - have struggled since the fall of the wall.
.
The same will be true in the Middle East, where democracy will not just spring up because autocrats fall down. It will arise only if these countries develop, among other things, export-oriented private sectors, which can be the foundation for a vibrant middle class that is not dependent upon the state for contracts and has a vital interest in an open economy, a free press and its own political parties. The development of such a private sector was crucial in democratizing Taiwan and South Korea.
.
That is why, beyond Iraq, America's priorities should be to sign a free-trade agreement with Egypt - which would help foster an export-oriented private sector there just when Mubarak has signaled an end to 50 years of military rule - and get Syria out of Lebanon, which would free the dynamic private sector that already exists there, but has been stifled by Syria. Free Lebanon and free Egypt's economy and they will change the rest of the Middle East - for free.
.
.
See more of the world that matters - click here for home delivery of the International Herald Tribune.
.
< < Back to Start of Article WASHINGTON From Baghdad to Beirut, the Middle East has seen a series of unprecedented popular demonstrations for democracy. There were, however, two street protests in December that got virtually no coverage, but were just as important, if not more. One took place in the Egyptian Nile Delta town of Mahalla and the other in the Suez Canal city of Ismailiya. Both of these raucous Egyptian demonstrations, which involved marches, strikes, denunciations of the government and appeals to Parliament, were triggered by President Hosni Mubarak's decision to sign the first substantial trade agreement with Israel since Camp David. That decision brought Egyptian workers from both areas into the streets. They were furious. They were enraged. Why?
.
They were not included in the new trade deal with Israel.
.
Now, that's a new Middle East. On Dec. 14, Egypt, Israel and the United States signed an accord setting up three Qualified Industrial Zones in Egypt. Any Egyptian company operating in one of these zones that imports from an Israeli company at least 11.7 percent of the parts, materials or services that go into the Egyptian company's final product can then export that finished product to the U.S. duty free.
.
This is a big deal for Egypt, which, unlike Jordan and Israel, does not have a free-trade treaty with the United States. As part of the accord, the United States named Greater Cairo, Alexandria and Port Said the three Qualified Industrial Zones. It had to be limited to only three municipalities so that the United States would not be swamped with Egyptian exports - hence the protests from the two big Egyptian manufacturing centers that were left out.
.
According to Rashid Mohamed Rashid, Egypt's impressive new minister of foreign trade, 397 Egyptian companies have already signed up to participate in the Qualified Industrial Zone program, most of them small and medium-size. Many of these Egyptian companies have already gone to Israel to forge deals with Israeli suppliers or started work with Israeli partners to identify export markets in the United States. Some Israeli companies are setting up shop in the Egyptian zones to provide services right on the spot.
.
There are a lot of messages in this bottle. One is that if you create a real opportunity for Israeli and Egyptian businesses to interact profitably, not only will Egyptians ignore the protests of the old Nasserites who want to boycott Israel, they will seize the opportunity and protest mightily if they are kept out.
.
Another message: This "Baghdad spring" will not blossom into sustainable democracy in any of these Arab states without a broader middle class and civil society institutions to support it. For too long, U.S. foreign policy was based on buying stability in the Arab world by supporting dictators, who destroyed the independent press, political parties, unions, real private sector and civil society - everything except the mosque. Iraq is the starkest example of this, which is why democratization there will take time.
.
Looking at Eastern Europe on the eve of the fall of the Berlin Wall, said Emanuele Ottolenghi, a lecturer on the Middle East at Oxford, "we could have predicted which countries would have an easy transition to democracy and which ones not." Countries like Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and the Baltic states, which had a history of liberal institutions and free markets that had been suppressed by Communism, quickly flourished. Others farther east, which were starting from scratch - Bulgaria, Romania and the former Soviet republics - have struggled since the fall of the wall.
.
The same will be true in the Middle East, where democracy will not just spring up because autocrats fall down. It will arise only if these countries develop, among other things, export-oriented private sectors, which can be the foundation for a vibrant middle class that is not dependent upon the state for contracts and has a vital interest in an open economy, a free press and its own political parties. The development of such a private sector was crucial in democratizing Taiwan and South Korea.
.
That is why, beyond Iraq, America's priorities should be to sign a free-trade agreement with Egypt - which would help foster an export-oriented private sector there just when Mubarak has signaled an end to 50 years of military rule - and get Syria out of Lebanon, which would free the dynamic private sector that already exists there, but has been stifled by Syria. Free Lebanon and free Egypt's economy and they will change the rest of the Middle East - for free.
.
.
See more of the world that matters - click here for home delivery of the International Herald Tribune.
.
< < Back to Start of Article WASHINGTON From Baghdad to Beirut, the Middle East has seen a series of unprecedented popular demonstrations for democracy. There were, however, two street protests in December that got virtually no coverage, but were just as important, if not more. One took place in the Egyptian Nile Delta town of Mahalla and the other in the Suez Canal city of Ismailiya. Both of these raucous Egyptian demonstrations, which involved marches, strikes, denunciations of the government and appeals to Parliament, were triggered by President Hosni Mubarak's decision to sign the first substantial trade agreement with Israel since Camp David. That decision brought Egyptian workers from both areas into the streets. They were furious. They were enraged. Why?
.
They were not included in the new trade deal with Israel.
.
Now, that's a new Middle East. On Dec. 14, Egypt, Israel and the United States signed an accord setting up three Qualified Industrial Zones in Egypt. Any Egyptian company operating in one of these zones that imports from an Israeli company at least 11.7 percent of the parts, materials or services that go into the Egyptian company's final product can then export that finished product to the U.S. duty free.
.
This is a big deal for Egypt, which, unlike Jordan and Israel, does not have a free-trade treaty with the United States. As part of the accord, the United States named Greater Cairo, Alexandria and Port Said the three Qualified Industrial Zones. It had to be limited to only three municipalities so that the United States would not be swamped with Egyptian exports - hence the protests from the two big Egyptian manufacturing centers that were left out.
.
According to Rashid Mohamed Rashid, Egypt's impressive new minister of foreign trade, 397 Egyptian companies have already signed up to participate in the Qualified Industrial Zone program, most of them small and medium-size. Many of these Egyptian companies have already gone to Israel to forge deals with Israeli suppliers or started work with Israeli partners to identify export markets in the United States. Some Israeli companies are setting up shop in the Egyptian zones to provide services right on the spot.
.
There are a lot of messages in this bottle. One is that if you create a real opportunity for Israeli and Egyptian businesses to interact profitably, not only will Egyptians ignore the protests of the old Nasserites who want to boycott Israel, they will seize the opportunity and protest mightily if they are kept out.
.
Another message: This "Baghdad spring" will not blossom into sustainable democracy in any of these Arab states without a broader middle class and civil society institutions to support it. For too long, U.S. foreign policy was based on buying stability in the Arab world by supporting dictators, who destroyed the independent press, political parties, unions, real private sector and civil society - everything except the mosque. Iraq is the starkest example of this, which is why democratization there will take time.
.
Looking at Eastern Europe on the eve of the fall of the Berlin Wall, said Emanuele Ottolenghi, a lecturer on the Middle East at Oxford, "we could have predicted which countries would have an easy transition to democracy and which ones not." Countries like Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and the Baltic states, which had a history of liberal institutions and free markets that had been suppressed by Communism, quickly flourished. Others farther east, which were starting from scratch - Bulgaria, Romania and the former Soviet republics - have struggled since the fall of the wall.
.
The same will be true in the Middle East, where democracy will not just spring up because autocrats fall down. It will arise only if these countries develop, among other things, export-oriented private sectors, which can be the foundation for a vibrant middle class that is not dependent upon the state for contracts and has a vital interest in an open economy, a free press and its own political parties. The development of such a private sector was crucial in democratizing Taiwan and South Korea.
.
That is why, beyond Iraq, America's priorities should be to sign a free-trade agreement with Egypt - which would help foster an export-oriented private sector there just when Mubarak has signaled an end to 50 years of military rule - and get Syria out of Lebanon, which would free the dynamic private sector that already exists there, but has been stifled by Syria. Free Lebanon and free Egypt's economy and they will change the rest of the Middle East - for free.
.
.
See more of the world that matters - click here for home delivery of the International Herald Tribune.
.
< < Back to Start of Article WASHINGTON From Baghdad to Beirut, the Middle East has seen a series of unprecedented popular demonstrations for democracy. There were, however, two street protests in December that got virtually no coverage, but were just as important, if not more. One took place in the Egyptian Nile Delta town of Mahalla and the other in the Suez Canal city of Ismailiya. Both of these raucous Egyptian demonstrations, which involved marches, strikes, denunciations of the government and appeals to Parliament, were triggered by President Hosni Mubarak's decision to sign the first substantial trade agreement with Israel since Camp David. That decision brought Egyptian workers from both areas into the streets. They were furious. They were enraged. Why?
.
They were not included in the new trade deal with Israel.
.
Now, that's a new Middle East. On Dec. 14, Egypt, Israel and the United States signed an accord setting up three Qualified Industrial Zones in Egypt. Any Egyptian company operating in one of these zones that imports from an Israeli company at least 11.7 percent of the parts, materials or services that go into the Egyptian company's final product can then export that finished product to the U.S. duty free.
.
This is a big deal for Egypt, which, unlike Jordan and Israel, does not have a free-trade treaty with the United States. As part of the accord, the United States named Greater Cairo, Alexandria and Port Said the three Qualified Industrial Zones. It had to be limited to only three municipalities so that the United States would not be swamped with Egyptian exports - hence the protests from the two big Egyptian manufacturing centers that were left out.
.
According to Rashid Mohamed Rashid, Egypt's impressive new minister of foreign trade, 397 Egyptian companies have already signed up to participate in the Qualified Industrial Zone program, most of them small and medium-size. Many of these Egyptian companies have already gone to Israel to forge deals with Israeli suppliers or started work with Israeli partners to identify export markets in the United States. Some Israeli companies are setting up shop in the Egyptian zones to provide services right on the spot.
.
There are a lot of messages in this bottle. One is that if you create a real opportunity for Israeli and Egyptian businesses to interact profitably, not only will Egyptians ignore the protests of the old Nasserites who want to boycott Israel, they will seize the opportunity and protest mightily if they are kept out.
.
Another message: This "Baghdad spring" will not blossom into sustainable democracy in any of these Arab states without a broader middle class and civil society institutions to support it. For too long, U.S. foreign policy was based on buying stability in the Arab world by supporting dictators, who destroyed the independent press, political parties, unions, real private sector and civil society - everything except the mosque. Iraq is the starkest example of this, which is why democratization there will take time.
.
Looking at Eastern Europe on the eve of the fall of the Berlin Wall, said Emanuele Ottolenghi, a lecturer on the Middle East at Oxford, "we could have predicted which countries would have an easy transition to democracy and which ones not." Countries like Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and the Baltic states, which had a history of liberal institutions and free markets that had been suppressed by Communism, quickly flourished. Others farther east, which were starting from scratch - Bulgaria, Romania and the former Soviet republics - have struggled since the fall of the wall.
.
The same will be true in the Middle East, where democracy will not just spring up because autocrats fall down. It will arise only if these countries develop, among other things, export-oriented private sectors, which can be the foundation for a vibrant middle class that is not dependent upon the state for contracts and has a vital interest in an open economy, a free press and its own political parties. The development of such a private sector was crucial in democratizing Taiwan and South Korea.
.
That is why, beyond Iraq, America's priorities should be to sign a free-trade agreement with Egypt - which would help foster an export-oriented private sector there just when Mubarak has signaled an end to 50 years of military rule - and get Syria out of Lebanon, which would free the dynamic private sector that already exists there, but has been stifled by Syria. Free Lebanon and free Egypt's economy and they will change the rest of the Middle East - for free.
.
iht.com



To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (48073)3/16/2005 7:28:01 PM
From: IQBAL LATIF  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 50167
 
Transition of power within Islamic world- Succession in the Ummah ——Razi Azmi

Iraq’s transition from monarchy to republic in 1958, thanks to a coup led by Brig Abdul Karim Qassem, was accomplished when the executed members of the royal family, including King Faisal II, were hung by their feet outside the palace

The road to high political office in the Ummah is a perilous one, frequently littered with corpses. In a dispensation of interminable tenures, where all the spoils belong to the victor, aspirants to political power must tread with care, for a wrong move could cost one his liberty or life. Those fortunate enough to reach the pinnacle of power must never let down their guard. Not even ties of blood or association, or holy lineage, ensure safety for either incumbent or aspirant. The struggle to get to the top and stay there results in farce, comedy and, most often, tragedy.

No government in Pakistan’s history has been able, or willing, to peacefully transfer power to a successor at the end of its term. One elected, autocratic prime minister was sent to the gallows and a military dictator was blown to smithereens in mid-air. Pakistan’s three most popular leaders, including two former prime ministers, are now living in forced exile abroad.

Bangladesh’s founding father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, was killed by a band of junior officers, along with nearly everyone who had the misfortune of sharing his genes. The new strongman, Maj-Gen Ziaur Rahman, hanged a hero of the liberation war and his close comrade, Col Abu Taher, in order to consolidate his power. Zia himself was later assassinated by military officers who were, in turn, quickly dispatched to meet their maker.

In Malaysia, Mahathir Mohammad sacked and jailed his deputy prime minister, Anwar Ibrahim, on false allegations of sodomy when the latter became overtly ambitious. Adding injury to insult, his police chief, Nur, personally kicked and punched the hapless Anwar — blindfolded and his hands tied behind his back.

Oman’s Qaboos bin Said installed himself as the Sultan in 1970 after deposing his father and imprisoning him. Qatar’s Crown Prince Hamad Bin Khalifa overthrew his father to become Emir in 1995.

In Jordan, a terminally ill King Hussein sprang from his deathbed in USA and briefly returned to his country in 1999 to depose his brother Crown Prince Hassan, his designated successor since 1965, and nominate his son Abdullah instead to succeed him.

Coups were an annual feature of Syrian politics until defence minister Hafez al Assad seized power and ruled with blood and iron for 30 years until his death in 2000, to be succeeded by his son Bashar al Assad.

Gamal Nasser, who had seized power by deposing King Farouk in 1953, offered to resign after leading Egypt to a disastrous defeat in the six-day war against Israel in 1967. However, the people begged him to stay on, and stay he did, until God removed him. Not so lucky was his successor, President Anwar Sadat, whose life was cut short by a hail of bullets in 1981. President Hosni Mubarak will soon complete a quarter century in office.

Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi has been there even longer, since overthrowing King Idris in 1969. When Algeria’s generals denied the Islamists the fruits of an election victory in 1991, they avenged this by slitting the throats of anyone on the government’s payroll they could catch as well as his womenfolk and children.

In neighbouring Tunisia, Prime Minister Ben Ali seized the presidency in 1987, for 84-year old Habib Bourguiba, president for 30 years and increasingly senile, had shown no inclination to quit. The former president-for-life lived his last 13 years under house arrest. Ben Ali has now been president for 18 years.

In 1985, Sudan’s President Gaafar Nimery, survivor of three coups since 1969 and a recent champion of sharia, hanged an Islamic scholar, Muhammad Taha, 76, accusing him of apostasy. The show trial was televised and the hanging of Taha was a public spectacle. Nimery was deposed later that year by his top general.

Afghanistan’s King Zahir Shah was overthrown in 1973 by his cousin and former prime minister, Sardar Mohammad Daoud. Five years later, President Daoud himself was brutally murdered by military officers along with his entire family. His successor, Nur Mohammad Tarahki was smothered with a pillow by his deputy, Hafizullah Amin, who was killed during the Soviet invasion.

After the Soviet withdrawal, the various factions of the mujahideen, brothers-in-Islam, fought a vicious struggle for power which, besides killing and crippling many tens of thousands of fellow Muslims, reduced Kabul to rubble. Out of the debris emerged the brutal Taliban regime, which killed everyone who offered a different opinion.

The Shah of Iran was overthrown by Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979. Lusting for retribution against the previous regime, the president of the Revolutionary Courts, Ayatollah Khalkhali, set about his task with zeal and gusto. He later claimed that, in the first four months alone, he condemned to death over 400 officials and army officers of the previous regime, including the Shah’s longest-serving prime minister, Amir Abbas Hoveida.

Not content with this, the Ayatollah “led an assault on the tomb of the Shah’s ancestors in 1980. After 200 militia men worked with bulldozers and high explosives for 20 days, the tomb was a pile of rubble and the bones of the dead lay smashed, scattered across the desert.” The Islamic Republic’s first elected president, Abolhassan Bani Sadr, himself did not feel safe from the murderous frenzy of the ayatollahs. Discretion being the better part of valour, he fled the country dressed as a woman.

Iraq’s transition from monarchy to republic in 1958, thanks to a coup led by Brig Abdul Karim Qassem, was accomplished when the executed members of the royal family, including King Faisal II, were hung by their feet outside the palace. Hysterical crowds dragged the body of Abd al-Ilah, the king’s uncle, former regent and presently crown prince, through the streets of Baghdad, where it was hacked into pieces. Prime Minister Nuri al-Said escaped, dressed as a veiled woman, but was caught and dragged through the streets from a car until there was nothing left but half a leg.

Qassem himself was tortured and killed in 1963. Faisal II was the great-grandson of Al-Hussein bin Ali, the last of the Hashemite Grand Sharifs of Mecca, descendents of Hazrat Ali, custodians of the holy cities and rulers of Hejaz for 700 years. That rule ended in 1924, when Al-Hussein was chased out by Abdul Aziz ibn Saud of Najd, the father of the present King Fahd of Saudi Arabia.

However, Al-Hussein was more fortunate than both his great-grandson Faisal II and son Abdullah, king of Jordan, with whom he found refuge after fleeing Mecca. Abdullah was assassinated in 1951 as he was entering Al Aqsa mosque in East Jerusalem (which was under Jordanian control until 1967) to offer Friday prayers.

In Iraq, Saddam Hussein’s rise from vice-president to president in 1979 was spectacular. At a meeting of the Revolutionary Command Council on July 22 he suddenly started reading the names of “enemies of the state”. There was a stunned silence as the list included the names of many of those present. “As names were read from the list, each was arrested and taken away from the council meeting. Within mere hours, 21 of the men that Saddam named were dead”.

Politics anywhere can be rather unpredictable, but among the Ummah it is, quite literally, a deadly serious issue, a life-and-death matter.

This is the third article in a series of four. The second appeared on March 10th. The last episode will look at the historical Ummah. The author, a freelance writer, may be contacted at raziazmi@hotmail.com