The Arabian
Peninsula has yielded few contemporary images as vivid as the 1991
Gulf War. The clean, virtual-reality fireworks display of 1991 has
been revised only marginally by reports on Gulf War Syndrome and
accounts of Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh's military commendations
for burying surrendering Iraqi soldiers alive with a bulldozer.
Since 1991,
coverage of events within the Arabian Peninsula has all but disappeared
from the evening news. Countries whose "stability" is deemed so
essential to Western security are described only in terms of "our"
weapons and oil rigs. Most English language news agencies honor
the tight censorship imposed by Western allies in the Gulf, and
relegate Yemen, with half of the Peninsula's native population,
to travel exotica. The minimal converge of last year's bombing of
American facilities at the Khobar Towers Complex in Saudi Arabia
was masked by vague references to an Iranian connection, also blamed
for Bahrain's civil unrest. Yemen's 1994 civil war was a blip on
CNN. Kuwaiti and Yemeni parliamentary elections merited feature
stories, not hard news coverage of parties, personalities or issues.
Conflicting border claims in the subcontinent are a well-kept secret.
Saudi Arabia,
the Peninsula's most powerful state and the linchpin of US policy,
is also the most inscrutable. Foreign researchers and reporters
are all but barred from the country while American soldiers and
oil company staff live inside fenced compounds. Its hyper-secrecy
has, in the past, made Saudi Arabia a valuable partner in US covert
operations from the contra war in Nicaragua to the jihad against
the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. During the oil bonanza of the 1970s
and '80s, and especially after the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan
and the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran, massive Saudi foreign assistance
fostered a particular brand of anticommunist, anti-Iranian Islamism.
Millions of dollars flowed to shari'a colleges and neo-Islamist
seminaries throughout the Islamic world. In neighboring North Yemen,
Saudis subsidized studies in "Islamic sciences," sponsored chairs
and symposia and recruited thousands of Islamist Sudanese, Egyptian
and Palestinian teachers to compensate for the shortage of qualified
Yemenis.
Yemen's leading
self-declared Muslim militant, 'Abd al-Majid al-Zindani and his
disciples not only preached but volunteered and recruited for the
anticommunist crusade in Afghanistan. In the neo-Islamist institutes
of Pakistan, they met with exiles, migrants, students and mercenaries
from Algeria to Afghanistan and with financiers such as the infamous
Ussama Bin Ladin, a Saudi of South Yemeni origin. These institutes,
teaching Qur'an memorization and guerrilla warfare in the name of
salafi (puritan) Islam, won notoriety for training the counterrevolutionary
Taliban.
The Afghan
network recruited migrants and exiles to another jihad against the
Yemeni Socialist Party (YSP) that began as a contra movement. This
shadowy Islamic Front assisted Sana'a's military campaign against
homegrown progressives in southern North Yemen in the early 1980s
and ended with the rout of the remnants of the South Yemeni army
in 1994, when al-Zindani condemned hundreds of thousands of YSP
members as "apostates."
The billions
of riyals spent on conventional parochial education, legal training
and private religious charities also helped produce a mainstream
conservative party in Yemen, the Islah or Reform Grouping, where
al-Zindani joined with secular, anticommunist tribal, merchant and
security forces to defeat the Socialists at the polls. Proud to
be "the first Islamist party to come to power through the ballot-box,"
Islah is a neo-conservative but nontraditional, republican party
that, while championing "family values," also launched a female
voter-registration drive in advance of the 1993 elections even as
the leaders of its women's section insisted women have the right
to separate facilities. Its charitable affiliate, the Islah Social
Welfare Society, the largest of several new religious and secular
relief and service providers, is a beneficiary of its affiliated
charities in the Gulf. Having encouraged this movement for over
a decade, Riyadh and Sana'a are now attempting to limit the widening
appeal of its reformist demands.
In pursuit
of "stability" in the Arabian Peninsula--of regimes, resources and
access to military facilities--US policy makers find themselves
in a dilemma. To support oil-exporting, weapons-importing friends,
and with a blind eye to their human rights practices, Central Command
is poised to "contain" not just Iraq and Iran but also the Islamist
forces unleashed against the former cold war foes. While Riyadh,
Washington and a few Gulf billionaires have funded politically expedient
religious indoctrination and/or methods of guerrilla warfare, they
and other Middle Eastern governments also have cultivated more passive
forms of religiosity to counter progressive ideologies. In doing
so, governments inadvertently have nursed a nascent neo-Islamist
movement whose most alienated youth emulate the successful Afghan
crusade but whose mainstream provides an increasingly crucial social
safety net.
Not long ago
Israel encouraged the development of religious movements, including
Hamas, in the Occupied Territories, hoping they would divert popular
loyalties from nationalist networks then affiliated with the Palestine
Liberation Organization. Israel is not alone in regretting the assumption
that religion would opiate the masses. To neutralize the once-powerful
left-leaning domestic opposition, and later to offset the disastrous
social effects of economic restructuring, regimes in Egypt, Sudan,
Algeria and Jordan also fostered Muslim youth and community groups
even as they attempted to censor Friday sermons. The Gulf potentates--fearful
even of the revolutionary republicanism of Yemen or Iran, where
women participate as voters, candidates and parliamentarians--have
tried to limit civic behavior (in the case of Saudi Arabia, all
public life) to sanctioned "Islamic" activities. Throughout the
region, the suppression of alternative forms of legitimate expression,
has left no legal outlets other than the increasingly politicized
religious groups.
The Gulf War
constituted a new round in inter-Arab royalist-republican competition
in and around the Arabian Peninsula. With Iraq under occupation,
this ongoing conflict's main flash-point is now the complex, multilayered
Yemeni-Saudi relationship. Many Saudi maps show no southern border,
and indeed a permeable, rugged, semiarid frontier crossed by migrants,
smugglers, currencies, ideologies and renegades lies beyond the
recently renegotiated line stretching from the Red Sea to above
the Razih mountains. Yemenis have seen a Saudi hand--though it is
unclear whether it is the hand of the state, or private individuals--in
every event in recent Yemeni history. The prospect of a populous,
unified, republican Yemen has long been anathema to Saudi Arabia.
Saudi dissidents applaud Yemen's republican model and parliamentary
elections (including female participation) as a positive example
for Saudi Arabia while Riyadh continues to press territorial claims
in the now oil-producing eastern and southern regions of Marib,
Shabwa and Hadramawt.
If, from the
Potomac, the Peninsula looks like America's Arabia, in the bright
sun of this subcontinent the giant casts a faint shadow. Much has
happened before and since 1991 that warns us against assuming that
political arrangements are either traditional or permanent. Boundaries
and fundamental questions of statehood and citizenship are unresolved.
Oil economies and especially the Yemeni labor reserve are in retrenchment,
and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) regimes are in a paradoxical
relationship with the West--open to its military, closed to its
scrutiny. These contradictions intersect with underlying social,
class, political, and generational forces in the cities, deserts
and farm communities of Arabia in complex, multifaceted ways. In
this issue of Middle East Report, we offer some insights
into some of these dynamics.
Morocco
serves as the backdrop for such Hollywood blockbusters as Gladiator,
Black Hawk Down and Body of Lies. The country’s breathtaking
landscapes and gritty urban neighbourhoods are the perfect setting
for Hollywood’s imagination.
Unbeknown
to most filmgoers, however, is that Morocco is embroiled in one of
Africa’s oldest conflicts - the dispute over Western
Sahara. This month the UN Security Council is expected to take up the
dispute once more, providing US President Barack Obama with an opportunity
to assert genuine leadership in resolving this conflict. But there’s
no sign that the new administration is paying adequate attention. Full
Story>>
Shortly
before assuming office, President Barack Obama was handed a missive
signed by such Washington luminaries as ex-national security advisers
Zbigniew Brezezinski and Brent Scowcroft, urging him to “explore
the possibility” of direct contact with Hamas. One month after
he entered the White House, Obama received an epistle from Ahmad Yousef,
a Gaza-based spokesman for the Islamist movement, making the same recommendation. “There
can be no peace without Hamas,” Yousef told the New York Times
when asked about the letter's contents. “We congratulated Mr.
Obama on his presidency and reminded him that he should live up to
his promise to bring real change to the region.”
There
is no word, as yet, on how the foreign policy doyens' message was
received, but Yousef's occasioned a huffy US rebuke of the UN Relief
Works Agency, whose top official in Gaza, Karen Abu Zayd, passed the
letter to Sen. John Kerry while he was visiting the devastated territory
in mid-February. Even a single sealed envelope, it seems, creates the
appearance that the Obama administration is breaking with the US vow,
enunciated first under President George W. Bush, not to speak with
Hamas until it agrees to renounce violence, abide by previous Palestinian
agreements with Israel and recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Full
Story>>
It
has been quite a week. For the first time, the international community
indicted a sitting president of a sovereign state. Omar al-Bashir
of Sudan stands accused by the International Criminal Court in The
Hague of "crimes against humanity and war crimes" committed
in the course of the Khartoum regime's brutal suppression of the
revolt in the country's far western province of Darfur. Having indicted
two other figures associated with the regime in 2007, ICC prosecutor
Luis Moreno Ocampo began building a case against the man at the top,
and on Wednesday, the court issued a warrant for Bashir's arrest.
Full Story>>
Speaking
to his people on January 18, hours after Hamas responded to Israel’s
unilateral suspension of hostilities with a conditional ceasefire
of its own, the deposed Palestinian Authority prime minister Ismail
Haniyeh devoted several passages of his prepared text to the subject
of Palestinian national reconciliation. For perhaps the first time
since Hamas’s June 2007 seizure of power in the Gaza Strip,
an Islamist leader broached the topic of healing the Palestinian divide
without mentioning Mahmoud Abbas by name.
At
a press conference the following day convened by Abu Ubaida, the
spokesperson of the Martyr Izz al Din al Qassam Brigades, the Hamas
military wing, the movement went one step further. “The Resistance”,
Abu Ubaida intoned, “is the legitimate representative of the
Palestinian people”. Full Story>>
Three
weeks after the war on Gaza, Israel declared a unilateral ceasefire
but refused to terminate its so-called defensive operations. In response,
Hamas declared a ceasefire for one week, until the withdrawal of
Israeli troops has been completed. For many in the West, the ceasefire
might seem like an occasion to celebrate, for the cessation of military
hostilities on both sides will perhaps renew the peace process. But
there are reasons to be critical of this ceasefire, since it continues
the situation in which Israel acts unilaterally. What we are actually
witnessing is a new phase of the catastrophe in Gaza. While the characteristics
of this phase are not yet known, Israel's violence has become ever
more evident. And perhaps this is why Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert
did not mention the word "peace" once in the speech he gave
to announce the ceasefire. The "peace process" might soon
be revealed as the other side of the coin to war -- its continuation
by other means -- that simultaneously feeds it. Full Story>>
Bob
Woodward’s four books chronicling the wars of President
George W. Bush are sensitive barometers of conventional wisdom in Washington.
Whereas the first volume, published in 2002 at the height of the self-righteous
nationalism gripping the capital after the September 11, 2001 attacks,
hailed Bush’s self-confidence in acting to protect the homeland,
the 2008 installment depicts the same man as cocksure and incurious.
This much is not news. More educational are Woodward’s hints
about the worldviews that will outlast this unpopular administration,
embedded in the organs of the national security state. Full
Story>>
The
Egyptian regime has once again succeeded in stifling freedom of speech,
this time not in Egypt, but in the US. Earlier this month, an Egyptian
court convicted a prominent Egyptian-American activist for his outspoken
criticism of the regime’s poor human
rights record in American public fora. The court accused Saad Eddin
Ibrahim, of "tarnishing Egypt's image" abroad. The conviction
referred primarily to writings he published in the foreign press; most
notably among them an August 2007 op-ed in the Washington Post in which
he criticized Egypt's human rights record and questioned the reasons
behind US aid to Egypt. Full
Story>>
Militant
Islam is under global scrutiny for clues to conditions that foster
its rise, and to strategies for reversing that growth. But the key
is not in Islamic doctrine, US foreign policy or formal ties to various
nations, as many analysts have asserted. It lies at the community
level, with clan and local leaders. Full
Story>>
Kurdish
parties have become kingmakers in Baghdad , and they know it. As
no federal government can work without them, they are pulling every
available political lever to expand the territory and resources they
control, trying to build the foundation of an independent Kurdish state.
But even more than territory, they need security. If everyone acts
quickly and wisely, that understanding could help resolve one of the
Iraq war’s thorniest issues. Full
Story>>
The
debate over the war in Iraq follows a yellowing script: The minute
someone suggests that the US move to withdraw its troops, war supporters
cry “Havoc!”
True to form, when no less a figure than Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri
al-Maliki stated he wants a timeline for a US pullout, John McCain
summoned the specter of dire consequences. “I’ve always
said we’ll come home with honor and with victory and not through
a set timetable,” McCain said. In his major foreign policy speech
on July 15, Barack Obama affirmed his support for a withdrawal timetable,
adding that the US must “get out as carefully as we were careless
getting in.” Obama’s position is the correct one, but he,
like many other war critics, has done too little to counter the refrain
that withdrawal is simply
“cutting and running,” a recipe for disaster. Full
Story>>