Category: Middle East

  • Paradise Lost

    Paradise Lost

    by Amy Waldman — Publishers Weekly, 7/14/2008

    Ariel Sabar’s father, Yona, was from an Armenian-speaking Jewish community in remote Kurdistan. Yona immigrated to California and had a son who felt alienated from Yona’s antiquated ways. In My Father’s Paradise (Reviews, June 23), Sabar journeys to Kurdistan to bridge the barrier.

    What is the most surprising thing you learned?

    How central Iraq was to the history of the Jewish Diaspora. This was Babylon, where most Jews were exiled when they were booted out of ancient Israel. This is where synagogue Judaism got its start and where the Babylonian Talmud was written. Iraq allowed Judaism to succeed and flourish in exile. In Kurdistan, it mattered more what your contributions were to the community than whether or not you were Muslim, Jewish or Christian. The terrain itself, the towering mountains that bred this community, kept out the ideologies and intolerance that have led to so much bloodshed in recent history.

    What was your father’s reaction when you told him you wanted to write about him, and did your relationship change as a result?

    Initially, I think he humored me. He was supportive, but thought I was a little crazy when I told him I wanted us to go to Iraq together. We talk more now and a lot of the old tensions that were there when I was younger have faded. I now see and appreciate the cultural inheritance he’s passed on to me.

    The book is about your father, but what did your mother think?

    She thought I captured him fairly well, but wondered, a little jealously I think, why I wasn’t also writing about her family. I told her that the story of the Ashkenazi Jews had been written many times, but my father’s story hadn’t. I wanted to bring the story of the Kurdish Jews to a wider audience.

    Is there a message you hope people will take away from the book?

    For much of its history, Iraq looked nothing like the place we read about in the headlines today. It was a country where Jews and Christians lived harmoniously with their Muslim neighbors. There were occasional rough times for religious minorities, but nothing on the scale of the Holocaust. What’s happening now is not representative of Iraq’s larger history. I hope people can come away thinking of Iraq in a more hopeful time, that some of the values that sustained that multicultural worldview are still there somewhere and can perhaps be recovered.

    Source: Publishers Weekly, 14/7/2008

  • Envoy Blair cancels visit to Gaza

    Envoy Blair cancels visit to Gaza

    From: Tolga Cakir <[email protected]>

    To: Haluk Demirbag

    Tony Blair is focusing on economic
    issues as Middle East envoy

    The international Middle East envoy, Tony Blair, has cancelled a planned visit to the Gaza Strip.

    A spokesman said that the visit had to be postponed because of a specific security threat.

    He would have been the most highly ranked international diplomat to visit the strip since the militant movement Hamas took control there in 2007.

    He was due to meet UN officials to discuss humanitarian work in the strip and visit a water treatment plant.

    He had not been expected to meet any representatives from Hamas.

    The international community does not recognise the Hamas government in Gaza.

    The European Union, the United States and Israel consider Hamas to be a terrorist organisation.

    The movement seized control of Gaza in June 2007 from Fatah forces loyal to the Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

    The former British prime minister was appointed as Middle East envoy in the same month by the Quartet – the US, the EU, the UN and Russia.

    Mr Blair was asked to focus on economic issues with the aim of bolstering the chances of a peace deal this year.

    Source: BBC, 15 July 2008

  • Karzai Opposes US Use of Afghan Soil Against Iran

    Karzai Opposes US Use of Afghan Soil Against Iran

    News

    Karzai Opposes US Use of Afghan Soil Against Iran

    »

    by: Sayed Salahuddin, Reuters UK

    According to Afghan president Hamid Karzai, his government wants to maintain peaceful relations with Iran and would be against the US stationing troops in Afghanistan to attack that country.
    (Photo: AFP / Getty Images)

        Kabul – Afghanistan opposes U.S. use of its territory for launching a possible attack against neighbouring Iran, President Hamid Karzai said in an interview broadcast on Monday.

        Iran has threatened to target Israel and U.S. interests in the region in the event of an attack against the Islamic Republic which is locked in a dispute with the West over its nuclear programme.

        Karzai said his government, which came to power after U.S.-led and Afghan forces overthrew the Taliban in 2001, had always tried to “keep the balance between the powers”.

        “We are attentive to the dangers,” Karzai told Radio Liberty when asked about the possible repercussions of a conflict between Iran and the United States.

        “Afghanistan should not become the battleground of differences of any country,” he said in a wide-ranging interview. “Afghanistan does not want its soil to be used against any country and Afghanistan wants to be a friend of Iran as a neighbour which shares the same language and religion.”

        Karzai said his government had facilitated talks between Tehran and Washington, and had also served as a messenger between both in the past.

        Washington, which has some 32,000 troops in Afghanistan and is the biggest aid donor to Kabul, has not ruled out military force against Iran.

        Meanwhile, Karzai said foreign troops had ignored his repeated calls to coordinate operations with Afghan forces to avoid civilian casualties.

        Nearly 700 Afghan civilians have been killed in the first six months of 2008, the United Nations says, 255 of them by Afghan and international forces.

        “This in reality is a disaster … many innocent people have been killed in the bombardment. For five years, routinely, I have been trying to prevent foreign forces from possibly harming our nation. Unfortunately, this effort has not had outcome I wanted, and as the nation expects,” Karzai said.

        Karzai brushed aside reports about a possible postponement of next year’s presidential election due to rising violence.

        He said Afghanistan favoured good ties with its other large neighbour, Pakistan, but said there were “elements in Pakistan’s intelligence and Pakistan’s army” who did not want a stable Afghanistan.

        ——–

        Editing by Jeremy Laurence.

  • Iran vs. the West

    Iran vs. the West

    Iran vs. the West

    Source: Aljazeera.net
  • The Turkish Dictionary

    The Turkish Dictionary

    Ghassan Charbel, Al-Hayat – 11/07/08

    The world lives in rhythm with Iranian blasts. When President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad does not issue his threats, Revolutionary Guard generals take over. The menu of threats is all too known: closing the Strait of Hormuz; targeting American ships; setting the Great Satan’s interests on fire; unavoidably abolishing Israel; eradicating the cancerous tumor and burning down Tel Aviv. With threats, come maneuvers, and when necessary, Iran announces testing a new generation of missiles. The message is clear: Iran has the means to translate its threats to actions and set fire to the region.

    The world was preoccupied with the Iranian missile serial, while Baghdad received Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on a visit both sides agreed on dubbing “historical”. Erdogan brought a message of hope to the Iraqis. He addressed them saying: “Be optimistic to cross this difficult phase and you will always find me by your side, God willing. The Turkish government and people will be standing by you.”

    It was remarkable to see, at the end of the talks,that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki announced the formation of the Higher council for Strategic Cooperation, aimed at organizing cooperation on all economic levels, combating terrorism, and handling water issues. Erdogan also added that both nations are working to let commercial exchange figures reach $25 billion. It was all talk of cooperation, investment and numbers. The Turkish prime minister also declared that he has received support from al-Maliki’s government and the Kurdistan Regional Government against the fighters of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which has resumed its violent activities inside Turkey.

    There is no doubt that the future of the Iraqi situation is a matter of concern for Turkey, with regards to its security and stability. It is likely that Turkey will be the biggest loser, in case Iraq slips into chaos. The reason is that a united Iraq guarantees confining the Kurdish dream within the Iraqi Kurdistan borders, whereas an Iraqi outburst would inevitably lead to the independence of this region and to turning it into a center that attracts Turkish Kurds. In this sense, it is worth noting that Ankara has a lot to gain from a united Iraq, whereas the Iranian role can only grow in a troubled Iraq, since the balances within a united Iraq prevent Tehran from pulling Iraqi strings at will.

    Turkey has no interest in a troubled Iraq, in which al-Qaeda settles to breed new generations of suicide bombers in certain parts of the country. It also has no interest in an Iraq, whose government does not exercise full control over its territories, which forces Turkey to occasionally organize disciplinary campaigns inside the Iraqi borders. Similarly, Turkey has no interest in an Iraq dominated by Iran, because that would disturb regional balances right at its borders. In this context, the visit can be viewed as an expansion of the scope of regional recognition that al-Maliki’s government enjoys, and also as an encouragement for it to adopt a national reconciliation policy that will enlarge, most of all, its scope of recognition among Arabs.

    In one of its facets, Erdogan’s visit to Iraq represents another step in Turkey’s efforts to contain the rising Iranian power in the region, efforts that are both calm and wise as they are carried out away from noise and emotional outbursts. This is evident from the fact that Turkey has not panicked or lost its nerve in front of its Iranian neighbor’s exercise of muscles, including its battle with the west over uranium enrichment.

    Turkey also assumes a more important role on another front. Erdogan’s government is playing a prominent role in hosting and mediating indirect negotiations between Syria and Israel on its territories. One can say that the successful transformation of these negotiations into direct talks sponsored by the US will represent a very serious attempt to establish peace in the Middle East and to contain the Iranian influence, which is reinforced by the atmospheres of confrontation. Of course, it is too premature to speak of an overt and explicit split between Syrian and Iranian calculations. However, the role Turkey is playing in the progress of the Syrian position is extremely important, given Turkey’s nature and its international alliances.

    From military participation in Afghanistan, to participating in the international forces in South Lebanon, to encouraging Syria to negotiate with Israel and support al-Maliki’s government, the gap between the Turkish and Iranian dictionaries seems vast. Resting on its Islamic roots and wearing Ataturk’s hat, Erdogan’s Turkey speaks the language of interests, figures, international law and realism, whereas Ahmedinejad scoops up firebrands from both the revolution and the dictionary of confrontation, while addressing the world with missiles.

    Source: Al-Hayat, 11/07/08