by Salman Hameed

While we are waiting for some sort of resolution to the nuclear talks (and yes, it will be an absolute shame if the US Congress ends up sabotaging the talks by imposing new sanctions at this time), here is a fascinating Fresh Air interview with Hoomad Majd, the author of The Ministry of Guidance Invites You to Not Stay.

There are three things that I want to highlight. First, he talks about the "Death to America" chant. He attributes it to the problem of translation. Yes, it does literally mean "death to America" - but it would be more accurate to translate as "down with America". And that this term for death "marg" is actually used quite frequently in colloquial Persian when someone is upset at something (he gave the example of "death to potato").

Second, I'm fascinated by the political use of sulking in Iran. Here is a small excerpt from the interview:

When we were in Iran, President Ahmadinejad — not being able to get his way on one particular thing he was trying to do, which was to fire an intelligence minister — engaged in a sulk. He decided to go home and say, "I'm not coming to work," and he did that for about 12 days. And it reminded me of this characteristic that we have in Iranian culture where people do sulk, whether it's for something as simple as a social sulk or a family sulk, or ... it's political.

And it goes all the way back in Iranian history and, most famously, [to] Prime Minister [Mohammad] Mosaddegh, who was overthrown by the CIA and British intelligence in 1953, who was constantly engaging in sulks in order to get his way, and if he didn't get his way he would suddenly fall ill or faint and cry and take to his bed, and even have meetings from his bed wearing pajamas.

Oh - I have to so adopt it at Hampshire College. Too bad I'm no longer chairing the faculty committee. Otherwise, I would have definitely used a sulk to faculty on board on contentious issues.

And the last point is about trash in Tehran. Hooman points out that Tehran is a very clean city of 14 million people and that trash is picked up 7 days a week. Here is an excerpt about the city of Tehran:

The city of Tehran is a very modern metropolis, and there's an emphasis in the Islamic republic on science and advancement and technology. We see that with the nuclear issue. So you do see there's industry, there's heavy industry; they make everything from cars to refrigerators to electronic goods. So it's a very modern place and very European-looking in many ways. That emphasis is something you don't see in a lot of other Islamic countries as much as you do in Iran...


[Tehran is] superbly maintained, as well as it can be, given that it's a sprawling city of 14 million people. They collect the trash every single day, seven days a week. It's remarkably clean ... even though there's heavy, heavy pollution.

Okay sign me up: I would love to visit Tehran. Iran was actually part of NSF evolution survey. However, because of the tensions after the 2009 elections, we dropped the idea of going to Iran. But if the relations between Iran and the US thaw a bit, I will definitely be seeking a way to visit the country. 

Listen to the full interview here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

It is fantastic that the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) - the largest Muslim organization in the US - has come out in support of employment anti-discrimination act. This must have been a contentious issue, but it is great that they ended up on the more progressive side. Here is the article (tip from Amina Steinfels):

Last week, one of the clearest shifts in the decades-long debate over Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) came into light from the largest U.S.-based Muslim organization, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), joined a broad interfaith coalition, calling ENDA a “measured, common sense solution that will ensure workers are judged on their merits, not on their personal characteristics like sexual orientation or gender identity.”



In a historic advancement for the LGBT rights movement, the Senate on Thursday approved ENDA, a bill that protects against workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Despite advances in anti-discrimination in the workplace, Muslims continue to face unfair job discrimination. Our shared experiences of discrimination can provide a common basis to work with one another to mold a more inclusive America.

Commenting on the shift of tone, Dr. Sharon Groves, Director of HRC’s Religion and Faith Program, regarded ISNA's support of ENDA as a major step in right direction.
“LGBT Muslims both in the U.S. and abroad need to hear from organizations like ISNA that their experiences as Muslims are recognized in the spirit of Islam’s emphasis on compassion and respect for all humanity,” said Groves.

The movement for greater acceptance of LGBT people in Islam is growing. LGBT Muslims continue to be at the forefront of cutting edge scholarship at the intersection of Islam and issues affecting the lives of LGBT Muslims. Around the nation and the world, LGBT Muslims and their allies are working to build an inclusive faith — and having some notable success.



And here is is the Pew survey on attitudes of American-Muslims on homosexuality:

 While their levels of acceptance are lower than the general population, the numbers in support are clearly on the rise, and not surprisingly, the youngest group is also the most receptive.

You can find the Pew report on American-Muslims here.

Also see this post from earlier: Muslims for Progressive Values (MPV) and a Washington imam for gay marriage.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

If you are in the area, join us for Wednesday lunch talk hosted by the Center for the Study of Science in Muslim Societies (SSiMS) and the School of Cognitive Science at Hampshire College. Here are the details:

Seeking Good Debate: Religion, Science, and Conflict in American Public Life

by 

Michael Evans

Neukom Fellow in the Neukom Institute for Computational Science and the Department of Film & Media Studies at Dartmouth College

Wednesday, October 30th, 2013

at Noon

Adele Simmons Hall, Hampshire College

Abstract: Why do science and religion seem to generate contentious public debate? In this talk I draw on computational linguistic analysis of over 10,000 newspaper articles, biographical research on key participants, and qualitative interviews with ordinary Americans to show that apparent conflicts in the public sphere over “science and religion” issues such as stem cell research, human origins, environmental policy, and the origins of sexuality actually result from a disconnection between the structure of elite debate in the American public sphere and the ideals of deliberative debate expected by ordinary Americans. I show how this insight helps explain several anomalies in current scholarship, such as why religious beliefs do not always impede support for science, why there is a gap between trust in science and trust in scientists, and why religious conservatives continue to dominate American public life. I also discuss the implications for science communication, particularly around issues where religion is involved.

Biographical statement: Michael Evans is an interdisciplinary scholar who uses computational and

qualitative methods to study contentious debates over science and technology issues. He has written about the social sources of public conflict over science and religion, how scientific elites shape interested publics, how narratives of continuity bolster scientific credibility, the role of religion in science communication, and the deliberative preferences of ordinary Americans, among other topics. He received his PhD in Sociology and Science Studies from the University of California, San Diego. Currently he is a Neukom Fellow in the Neukom Institute for Computational Science and the Department of Film & Media Studies at Dartmouth College. http://www.dartmouth.edu/~neukom/programs/neukom_fellows_14.html


In the Adele Simmons Hall (ASH) Lobby at Hampshire College.         
A light lunch will be available at noon.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

The Egypt Independent has a nice profile of the growing number of atheists in Egypt. Instead of just relying on second-hand accounts, the members of the newspaper staff met with 15 atheists at cafe in downtown Cairo. The stories they tell are familiar and heartbreaking: families disowning kids,  parents resorting to violence, and even companies firing individuals for their (non)religious views.

So couple of general comments: It is not surprising that atheists exists in deeply religious Muslim countries. But even within atheism, there are all sorts of different shades - from the more familiar agnostics and atheists, to those who consider themselves not-religious but may still pray regularly (a case of cultural conditioning) to those who cognizantly embrace the surrounding Muslim culture and its affiliated religious customs. But overall we are seeing a increasing trend of self-expression especially when it comes to religious beliefs ("it is my belief") and this comes from the spread of university education as well as an exposure to broader debates via the internet and satellite television (there is also a trend of increased religiosity based on personal interpretation of the Qur'an - and it is shaped by the same self-confidence from education and worldly experience). As much as I disagree with Dawkins' Islamophobia, he does deserve credit for making atheism an acceptable "religious" position worldwide. Not surprisingly, the article also
noted the fact that most of these "open" atheists are young - in their 20s. It is the same generation that has been behind the movements for democratic representations as well.

Where will it lead to? Indeed in the short run there is going to be a backlash. But overall, we are looking at the early stages of the development of religion as a matter of personal belief. While much of these atheists and cultural Muslims may belong to a privileged or upwardly mobile middle classes, there still exists enormous socioeconomic and education disparities where religion can be used as a weapon. This is something we are seeing in Bangladesh right now (see this earlier post: Standing with Bangladesh's Secular Bloggers), where Jamaat-e-Islami has been "accusing" their young rivals of being atheists and has been successful in shifting the focus away from their own atrocities in the 1971 civil war.

So stay tuned on this issue.

Now back to the Egypt article. Here is the bit where these young atheists talk about the consequences of coming out as an atheist:

Those who have come out publicly as atheists have been not only isolated by their friends and families, but also society in general. However, others who turn down their familial religion have faced many worse trials than mere isolation.

Asmaa Omar, 24, who has just graduated the Faculty of Engineering, said that once she revealed her beliefs to her family, they began to physically and mentally torture her. Her father slapped her in the face and broke her jaw. She was not able to eat properly for seven months.

Both her immediate and extended families began to insult her. “You just want to have free relations with boys,” they would say, or “You used to be the best girl in the family,” and “Now you’re a prostitute.”

By now, she said, most of her friends have cut their ties with her and other girls no longer speak to her after she took off her veil.

Milad Suliman, or better known as Evan, was fired from his company over his beliefs. His boss confronted him with the ideas he shared on his Facebook page and told him the company could not have an atheist among its employees.

His family was not happy either. They told him his ideas were shameful and this was the reason their home was no longer blessed.

Another atheist, Sarah al-Kamel, 24, fears this very isolation, thus has chosen not tell her family of her beliefs after her newly adopted ideas created a wedge between her and her friends.

Despite the risks of coming out, many atheists I spoke to claim their numbers have slowly been on the rise following the 25 January Revolution. The rise in atheism could be seen as a by-product of the revolution pushing the boundaries of commonly-held belief systems and breaking down previous political, social and religious restrictions.

Read the full article here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

I could not embed the video, but here is the link to this week's Frontline episode titled Egypt in Crisis. It does not provide any new picture, but it does show some heartbreaking images from some of the recent violence in Cairo. Here is the trailer for the episode:


The Frontline website also has this page that links other news stories that provide a broader context: Dig Deeper - More on Egypt's Political Turmoil. Also, listen to this excellent Fresh Air interview with David Kirkpatrick, who has been doing a fantastic job reporting from Cairo for the New York Times. Here is are two short bits from the interview that might be of interest for the broader context:

On what forces might have been behind Morsi's ouster 

"When the generals stepped in to remove President Mubarak at the end of those 18 days of protest in Tahrir Square, they did it with a relatively anonymous communiqué from the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces. This time was different. This time it was a televised press conference. It was Gen. [Abdel Fattah al-]Sisi standing alone looking rakish almost in a short-sleeved shirt and a black beret, surrounded by civilian leaders seated behind him. ... 

"So right there it changed him, and it changed the perception of the event, and it thrust him into the public spotlight. And he's followed that up with a number of carefully choreographed public speeches and presentations — you know, footage on private and state-run television of the military intervening to protect the people, set against kind of heroic, operatic scores. So I don't know. It may be that in addition to everything we might say about what the military's interests were and what their role was in the Egyptian state, it may be that Gen. Sisi sees an opportunity here for himself." 

On the aborted conversation of what pluralism would look like in an Islamic democracy 

"One of the most fascinating things we saw over these two years since the Arab Spring broke out — as the Islamic movement around the region stepped closer to power, found themselves actually for the first time winning elections and making decisions — a new debate broke out within the Islamic political movement about what did it really want? What would an Islamic democracy look like? How could it make peace with pluralism? 

"And you saw the movement itself changing. You saw people who had shunned the ballot box, embracing the ballot box because they saw new opportunities there. ... You saw new debates within the Muslim Brotherhood about whether their movement ought to go back to its roots and just do preaching and social work, and separate out the politics. In another direction, you know, what should be the role of Christians in an Islamic-dominated democracy, and what does that mean? ... This notion that any one person could speak for Islam in politics was crumbling. You know, that debate itself was ending that idea which to my mind is itself an opening for democracy. This event closes that down. That debate inside Egypt is over for the moment."

Listen to the full interview here.

I also had a chat with the editor of Nature Middle East, Mohammed Yahia, after the July coup. He lives in Cairo and he provided his thoughts on the ongoing political turmoil. Here is the link to our conversation: Mohammed Yahia on Science, Democracy, and the Unfinished Revolution in Egypt.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

It is easy to target a minority. History, unfortunately, is full of such examples. We are seeing one of the extreme cases unfolding in Pakistan. Just recently, a bunch of religious "scholars" got together to celebrate the 39th anniversary of the second amendment to Pakistan's constitution - the amendment that officially declared Ahmadis non-Muslims. There once was a time, when an imam or an a'lim was expected to talk about compassion, charity, and other actions that could potentially help fellow human beings. But not today - at least not the ones that were gathered in Lahore. The "scholars" that were celebrating the second amendment primarily offered provincialism, scorn,  and hate. It is a shame that their interpretation of religion has left them with this sad and tragic courses of actions. But they are also being egged on by a majority of Pakistanis (see the Pew survey results below).

It is fantastic that Express Tribune has provided the quotes from this "alim". Here is a sampling:

Several clerics called for further persecution of the Ahmadi community at conferences held on Saturday night to mark the 39th anniversary of the passage of the Second Amendment, which declared Ahmadis to be non-Muslims.

The speakers branded Ahmadis enemies of Pakistan, called for their social and economic boycott, and demanded that they be banned from taking up any government or military jobs.

 For the actual quotes, lets start with head of the Moon-sighting committee:

At the Markazi Khatm-i-Nabuwat Conference in Johar Town, Ruet-i-Halal Committee Chairman Mufti Muneebur Rehman said that he and his followers were prepared to make sacrifices for Khatm-i-Nabuwat. He alleged that Ahmadis were involved in “suspicious activities” and “serious measures” were needed against them. 

Dr Amir Liaqat Hussain, of Geo TV fame, defended Pakistan’s blasphemy laws. He said that the Ummah needed to unite in support of the laws. He said that they would not allow any amendment to the laws. 

Maulana Muhammad Azam Naeemi said there was a need to mobilise the common man against Ahmadis. Maulana Raghib Hussain Naeemi termed Ahmadis and their leaders “stooges of the West”.

Oh - and we haven't even gotten to the real vile comments yet. And again, I should remind you that these are folks who are representing some form of religious organization or, in some unfortunate cases, are religious celebrities. Here are some more highlights:

Pir Muhibullah Noori, caretaker of Baseerpur, said that Ahmadis should be banished from Pakistan. He told the audience that if they truly loved the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), they would not let Ahmadis live their lives freely. 

Allama Raza-i-Mustafa said Ahmadis should be chased till death.

So the love of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) translates into not letting Ahmadis live lives freely! And if "Allama" holds any meaning, the latter is openly calling for the killing of Ahmadis (a genocide?)! Note that this is being reported in a mainstream newspaper.

And here is a retired judge:

Justice (retired) Mian Nazeer Akhtar said that the time for speeches against Ahmadis was over and it was now time to do something practical. He said everyone should play their role against Ahmadis to tighten the noose around them. 

The participants in the conference passed a resolution demanding a ban on Ahmadi publications and legal action against their publishers; the removal of all Ahmadis from government jobs; government-sponsored celebrations of September 7 at a national level; and for the introduction of a new oath of office for holders of important posts affirming that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the last prophet.

I forgot to mention that all of the above was from just one of the gatherings. Here is a sampling from another one:

The 26th annual International Khatm-i-Nabuwat Conference, organised by the International Khatm-i-Nabuwat Movement, was held in Chenab Nagar, whose population is mostly Ahmadi. 

The speakers at the conference made derogatory remarks about Jamaat-i-Ahmadia leaders and blamed them for terrorism in Pakistan. 

Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (JUI) Secretary Maulana Abdul Rauf Farooqi said it was time to pounce on Ahmadis. He called them apostates and said that they deserved “extreme steps”.
Allama Muhammad Younas Hasan said that a “massive search operation” should be launched across the country to identify all of them. He said that he and his followers were willing to make “any sacrifice” for their cause. He said all sects of Islam were united in their opposition to Ahmadis. He said that Muslims should boycott Ahmadis socially and economically to make it harder for them to live in Pakistan. 

Maulana Qari Shabbir Ahmed Usmani said that the struggle against Ahmadis would continue “till its logical end”. He said all Ahmadis and their leaders should convert in order to gain Allah’s blessings. 

Maulana Asadullah Farooq demanded a ban on Ahmadis joining the armed forces as they were “traitors”.

Read the full article here. This is not just shameful, but here we are looking at the calls for severe persecution and extermination of a group based on their religious identity. We should not be witnessing something like this in the 21st century.

Pew also looked at the views of Pakistanis on Ahmadis. Here is what they found:

Now Pew didn't ask the question, but I'm wondering what fraction of the 66% would go along with the calls for persecution of Ahmadis. Perhaps, it is good that the Pew survey didn't ask that question as I fear the numbers would be too depressing.

But they did find that there is widespread support for Pakistan's Blasphemy law, which has been used to persecute minorities on so many occasions:

The poll also found that a majority of Pakistani Muslims support the country’s blasphemy laws, which predate Pakistan’s independence in 1947 but have since been expanded. The laws, which carry a potential death sentence for insulting Islam, have been frequently invoked against Ahmadis and other religious minorities in Pakistan; although formal criminal prosecutions are rare, social discrimination and harassment of Ahmadis is widespread. Fully 75% of Pakistani Muslims say blasphemy laws are necessary to protect Islam in their country, while 6% say blasphemy laws unfairly target minority communities, and 19% express no opinion on the issue.

Read the Pew report here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

As the Obama administration marches towards the inevitable bombing of Syria, it seems that almost half of all Americans oppose this action (see the Pew results here). Now, in theory, a moral argument can always trump public opinion. But in this particular case, it is the preservation of US "credibility" that seems to be driving the push for bombing. In an alternative universe that would play as a black comedy, but here the consequences may include the worsening of humanitarian crisis and a further escalation of sectarian tensions. It is not that Assad is exactly a mushy and nice fellow. But we have to understand the consequences of bombing for the people that we are supposedly trying to save.

Here are two excellent articles on the Syrian situation. The first one is by Hampshire College professor, Omar Dahi, and focuses on how to think about these chemical attacks: Chemical Attacks and Military Interventions:

It is hard to avoid the hopeless feeling that Syrians have lost almost all agency over their collective future. The European Union, Gulf, and the United States may very well increase armaments to the rebels, the United States may launch cruise missiles into Syria, NATO may impose a no-fly zone or invade part or all Syrian territory. But whatever actions take place, continuing to claim them in the interests of the Syrian people is simply an exercise in public relations and deception. 

Both the supporters of the government and the rebels continue to frame the possible outcomes of the conflict as either a victory for the government or the rebels—a way to avoid coming to terms with the third possibility: that both sides have already lost. The only option left for Syrians still interested in stopping the fall further down the abyss is to demand a political settlement and massive aid to help heal the mass humanitarian catastrophe inside Syria and the neighboring countries. It would be the beginning of politics and possibilities—very bleak ones as things stand, but nevetheless ones that do not now exist.

Read this full article here.

And here is one by Vijay Prashad, who is currently the Edward Said Chair at the American University of Beirut: Letter to a Syrian Friend Who Said: ‘Your Opposition to the US Attack on Syria Means You Support the Asad Regime’ (with a little Habib Jalib at the end):

I recognize that you are in the midst of a civil war and that what I propose sounds to you like surrender. You wish to fight on, with the messianic view that eventually you will prevail over the regime of Asad. This might be the case, but the odds are stacked against you as much as they are stacked against the Asad regime that it will have a complete victory. Neither of you are willing to see that the human suffering is not worth the chances of triumph. Empire enjoys watching the two sides battle like caged mice, weakening each other to its advantage.  

Syria deserves better. But now the cord of Syrian nationalism is wrapped around the neck of the Syrian people, asphyxiating your dreams of sovereignty and freedom. A mediated peace alongside a process for genuine democratization guaranteed by your neighboring states would strengthen the chances for the renewal of your national ambitions. Anything else will simply lead to the destruction of your country, its history, and its future. I am not in favor of the gallows of Ba‘th, nor the execution chambers of Jabhat al-Nusra, neither the guns of NATO nor the neoliberal spirits of the Gulf Arab regimes. Humans have complex minds, and even more complex ambitions. It is for us on the Left to foster those desires, and not to fall prey to the choices of the present. Neither this nor that, but only the future.
For you, my friend, a taste of the great Pakistani leftwing poet Habib Jalib, this is the opening of Dastoor, from 1962: 

Deep jis ka sirf mehellaat hi mein jalay,
Chand logon ki khushyon ko lay ker chalay,
Wo jo saye main har maslihat kay palay;
Aisay dastoor ko,
Subh-e-bay noor ko,
Main naheen maanta,
Main naheen jaanta. 

The light that shines alone in palaces,
Steals away the people’s happiness.
Feigns its strength from other’s weakness.
That kind of system,
Dawn without light,
I refuse.
I deny

Read the full article here.

And here is the main Pew Survey of American public opinion on Syrian airstrikes:

And there is opposition from Democrats, Republicans, and Independents:

The new national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Aug. 29-Sept. 1 among 1,000 adults, finds that Obama has significant ground to make up in his own party. Just 29% of Democrats favor conducting airstrikes against Syria while 48% are opposed. Opinion among independents is similar (29% favor, 50% oppose). Republicans are more divided, with 35% favoring airstrikes and 40% opposed.

And here is how most Americans see the impact of these airstrikes:

Read the full Pew report here. By the way, Obama is currently in Stockholm. Can't the Nobel committee take its 2009 Peace Prize back? 

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

There is a new paper out in the Journal of the Academy of Religion that provides a broad overview of the various creationist movements in Europe. The title of the paper is Creationism in Europe: Facts, Gaps and Prospects (you can download the full paper!) and it is authored by Stefaan Blancke, Hans Henrik Hjermitslev, Johan Braeckman, and Peter Kjaergaard. The same team is also behind a follow-up edited volume on this topic coming out in 2014, where I have also contributed a chapter on Islamic Creationism in Europe, and Martin Reixinger has a chapter on Turkey.

I had a chance to have a conversation with the lead author for the paper, Dr. Stefaan Blancke, who is affiliated with the Department of Philosophy and Moral Sciences at Ghent University, Belgium. If you have 15 minutes to spare, here is the video:

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

I'm back from the break and I'm catching up on good and the bad news. So lets start with a recent Pew survey on the views of Americans on IVF, Stem cell research and abortion. All three of these issues are deeply tied to politics and legal matters here in the US and also feature in science in religion debates. Here is the broad picture of American views:

I'm actually surprised that there isn't much difference in opinion between embryonic and non-embryonic stem cell research, but that may be because "stem cells research" in the news often now stands for embryonic stem cell research - as that is the point of controversy for some. At the same time, political and ideological leanings do make a bigger difference in embryonic stem cell research than for non-embryonic stem cell research:

As with abortion, men and women are about equally likely to say embryonic stem cell research is morally acceptable. Similarly, adults ages 50 and older are about equally likely as younger adults (18 to 49 years) to say that conducting embryonic stem cell research is morally acceptable. However, college graduates are somewhat more inclined than those with less education to consider this practice morally acceptable. 

There also are differences when it comes to partisanship and ideology. About three-quarters of Democrats and independents who lean toward the Democratic Party consider embryonic stem cell research either morally acceptable or not a moral issue. Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are more inclined than their Democratic counterparts to consider such research morally wrong. Similarly, self-described conservatives tend to see embryonic stem cell research as morally wrong more than either moderates or liberals do. 

Among the major religious groups, white evangelical Protestants are most likely to say embryonic stem cell research is morally wrong. However, in comparison to attitudes toward abortion, differences among religious groups are relatively modest.
...
A separate question on the survey asked about the moral acceptability of medical research using stem cells that do not derive from human embryos. The overwhelming majority of adults say that non-embryonic stem cell research is either morally acceptable (33%) or is not a moral issue (42%); only 16% say such research is morally wrong. 

There are only modest differences in opinion among social and demographic groups on this issue. For example, there are no significant differences in opinion on non-embryonic stem cell research by political party and only modest differences by ideology. However, moderates and liberals are somewhat more inclined than conservatives to say non-embryonic research is not a moral issue. And those with a college degree are more likely than those with fewer years of formal education to say that non-embryonic stem cell research is morally acceptable.

Read the full report here.

I haven't seen Muslim views on IVF and embryonic stem cell research, but here are opinions on abortion:

Some of this not surprising (though look at the difference between Pakistan and Bangladesh!). Also, too bad that Iran is not in this sample - as it is possible that their views would have stood out. However, at least 10% of respondents in 13 countries think that this is not a moral issues:

In 13 countries however, at least one-in-ten Muslims say abortion is not a moral issue. This view is especially common in some countries in the Middle East-North Africa region; 34% in Jordan, 22% in Egypt and 21% in Iraq say they do not consider abortion to be a moral question. 

Additionally, in 11 of the countries surveyed, at least one-in-ten Muslims volunteer that the morality of having an abortion depends on the situation. Half of Azerbaijani Muslims and more than a third (34%) of Muslims in Tajikistan take this view. Overall, this perception is most common in Central Asia and the Middle East-North Africa region.

Read the Pew report on Muslim views here.

Read More »

Salman Hameed

Ehsan Masood has an article in this week's Nature that talks about the promise of scientific development by the Muslim League, that won the recent elections quire handily. I did not know that, but the Muslim League explicitly placed science at the center of their governing strategy. Alas, the reality has turned out to be a bit different:

Few general-election manifestos devote an entire chapter to promises in science and technology, so the campaign documents from the centre-right Pakistan Muslim League

stood out. In its bid for power earlier this year, this party of landowners and industrialists did something unexpected: it pledged to put science and technology at the heart of its governing strategy. 

It promised one million new high-tech jobs in the next five years. It talked of new funding agencies for biotechnology and nanotechnology, of new programmes in fuel cells and small satellites, and of revamping agricultural research. And it included a promise that the state would not interfere in the appointment of university vice-chancellors. 

If kept, the promises would mark a step in the right direction for Pakistan, helping it to shed its reliance on international aid and edge towards economic independence and stability. But they seemed a little too good to be true.

But Ehsan is disappointed by the choice of the new Minister of Science:

The latest incumbent, Zahid Hamid, is an unpromising choice for science minster. The position was his reward from the Muslim League for switching political sides — and it is questionable whether he has the vision or the experience to effect the changes promised by the league. 

Hamid also faces a political challenge that could see him exit the ministry as quickly as he arrived. He once was loyal to the former military dictator General Pervez Musharraf, who is now awaiting trial and may be charged with treason. If Musharraf goes down, it would undermine Hamid and leave him ripe for replacement. 

There is no shortage of candidates to take his place — people who have a record of building successful institutions at the interface of knowledge and commerce, despite the poor track record of Pakistan's science ministry. Any one of these would be well placed to turn the promises of the manifesto into reality. 

Science does have the ear of the new prime minister, Nawaz Sharif. The man who was instrumental in placing science at the heart of the league's manifesto, Ahsan Iqbal, is minister for planning and development and a member of Sharif's inner circle. Should Hamid depart, Iqbal would have a golden opportunity to push for a widely respected and heavy-hitting science minister.

I have not been following the details of Pakistani political scene, so I don't know about the potential choices. However, Ehsan has some ideas - and they look good:

One candidate is plant geneticist Kauser Malik, founding director of the National Institute for Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering in Faisalabad and one-time chairman of the Pakistan Agricultural Research Council. Malik has experience as both bench scientist and high-level administrator. He also has plenty of international connections and a record of delivering results. Alternatively, the government could look to the next generation and appoint Muhammad Iqbal Choudhary, director of the HEJ Research Institute of Chemistry at the University of Karachi, which is among the largest such facilities in Asia. 

A wild card would be Asad Umar, former chief executive of Engro, which he grew from a mid-size company to one of the continent's largest conglomerates, spanning agrochemicals to energy. Young, cricket-mad and popular with the public, Umar quit his job to join former cricketer Imran Khan's political party, Tehreek-e-Insaf, which in May came from nowhere to become the country's third electoral force. 

Umar's decision to leave business for politics is part of a bigger trend among younger, middle-class and highly networked voters to become politically active. Unusually for Pakistan, many queued for the best part of a day to cast their votes in May's elections. Even if Hamid stays in his post, the government might consider appointing a heavy-hitter to take charge of the science-for-growth strategy, and have him or her report to Iqbal in the Planning Commission. That person could then get on with the task of dragging Pakistan into the twenty-first century.

Asad Umar sounds like an interesting bet and he may bring some energy to the science policy. Furthermore, it will be good to have a federal minister from outside the ruling party. That will be another sign that the government is taking their words about the importance of science seriously.

Read the full article here.

P.S. I know that Ehsan takes quite a positive view of a past science minister, Dr. Atta-ur-Rehman, who indeed increased the science budget tremendously and reformed higher education. However, the effectiveness of such a strategy, without building a strong infrastructure has also been questioned - and the legacy of Atta-ur-Rehman remains very much in the air (for example, amongst its Muslim cohorts, Pakistan's scientific publications are still way behind Turkey, Iran, Egypt, and Malaysia). But I was also dismayed by Atta-ur-Rehman when he wrote a highly dubious article that stoked conspiracy theories about US controlling the weather in Pakistan! There is plenty to critique about the US policy towards Pakistan, but it is a bit problematic when a prominent scientist uses highly dubious pseudoscientific claims to make his point. See my post from 2010: A Prominent Pakistani Scientist is Stoking Conspiracy Fires.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

Our usual Film Autopsy is on hiatus for the summer, so I thought I'll suggest a few films to save you from summer monsters and superheroes. Some of these films have a tengential connection to the blog but two are relevant for their connections to politics impacting the larger Muslim world.

So here we go:

Science Fiction
Europa Report:
At a time of big-budget but dumb science fiction films, Europa Report is a breath of fresh air. I have a review coming up later, but I should say that the filmmakers have done their work in terms of science and they present a (relatively) realistic scenario of a mission to Jupiter's moon, Europa and the potential of life there. Europa, of course, is one of the best (or perhaps the best) locations in our Solar system to find life. We know that there is a salty liquid water ocean under the ice sheet of this Jovian moon. Furthermore, there are underwater volcanoes that may provide the necessary energy for lifeforms to survive and thrive. Some of these  conditions mimic the underwater volcanoes here on Earth.

The film uses a mock-documentary format to present us with details of this mission to Europa. This is a low budget film but they have done a good of creating Europan landscapes and of utilizing images from the Galileo spacecraft. The tone of the film is a bit dour and some better developed characters would have helped. But these are small quibbles for a good science fiction film that embraces the spirit of scientific discovery. Here is the preview of the film:

Relevant for the current geopolitical debates:
Dirty Wars:
This is a documentary that follows accomplished journalist, Jeremy Scahill. The movie is centered on night raids in Afghanistan, missile and drone strikes in Yemen, and the mercenary war in Somalia. This is not a sensational demonization of the US government nor does it contain exaggerated claims. Instead, it shows how Scahill pieces his reports together and finds out about US military operations that are often not reported in the newspapers.

The film opens with a case in Afghanistan and it has a chilling conclusion. But worse, Scahill finds that such operations are taking place 30-40 times a night - with accompanying civilian casualties. In Yemen, he tracks down the damage of one of the first missile strikes - with casualties including mostly women and children. A Yemeni reporter who wrote about it, ended up in jail. Scahill also interviews the father of Anwar al-Awlaki - the first American citizen targetted and killed by a drone strike - both before and after the killing. Even more chillingly, Anwar al-Awlaki's 16-year old son was also killed in a drone strike soon after the killing of his father.

Dirty Wars is rich with information and avoids the pitfalls of being polemical. However, it is unnecessarily stylized by the director. I think the strength of the documentary is in its material and its stylization as a spy-thriller becomes somewhat a distraction. Nevertheless, this is a fantastic and important documentary. Here is the preview of the film:



We Steal Secrets: The Story of Wikileaks
This is all the more relevant because of the NSA leaks by Edward Snowden and the recently concluded trial of Bradley Manning - the source behind the Wikileaks documents. Directed by Alex Gibney, the documentary focuses on the founder of Wikileaks, Julian Assange, and Bradley Manning. While Assange comes off as a quirky anarchist (my favorite scene is with Assange talking in the phone while casually jumping on a trampoline at an estate outside of London), it is the story of Manning that is at the heart of the film. And what a story! Manning was not really meant for the military and never got adjusted to it. He also wanted to be a woman and was planning on a sex change operation in the future. And amidst all of that, he was anguished by the actions of the US government, and inspired by Sagan's Pale Blue Dot, he provided Wikileaks with top secret documents, starting with a video that showed the killing of a Reuters journalist in Iraq by a US gunship, and followed it up with US diplomatic cables. It is absolutely heartbreaking (and outrageous) to know that after his arrest, Manning was placed in a solitary confinement for almost a year and treated in a sub-human way.

Like Dirty Wars, this is also an important documentary for this time. Here is the preview of the film:



Fruitvale Station: 
This is not a documentary, but it is based on a tragic shooting of a 22-year old African-american by the police at a Bart station in San Francisco. The film traces the last day of the life of Oscar, and it does so in a delicate and nuanced way, without emotionally exploiting the subject. Race and class issues in the US, obviously, are at the heart of the film. This is a superb film with fantastic performances. Here is a preview for the film:




Just a great film from this summer:
Mud:
This is the best movie I have seen this summer. It is directed by Jeff Nichols, who also directed the superb 2011 film, Take Shelter (check out our Film Autopsy here). Set in Arkansas on the banks of the Mississippi river, this is one of the best coming-of-age films. But it also has abstract shades of religion, superstition, and mythology - and that combines to make this a powerful film. The director is only 35 years old. He has written and directed three films. I have not yet seen Shotgun Stories, but I absolutely loved Take Shelter and Mud. Perhaps more excitingly, Jeff's next project is a sci-fi film and I can't wait to see it.

In any case, here is the preview for Mud:

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

NASA has just released a spectacular image of the Earth - from Saturn (yes, yes, it is the dot below the rings). The photograph is taken by the Cassini-Huygens spacecraft that is currently orbiting Saturn, about 900 million miles away (our Sun is only 93 million miles from the Earth!). More below - but first I want you to just enjoy this stunning image:

The Saturn in this picture is blocking the Sun, and therefore allowing the spacecraft to take the picture of our home world. In addition, Saturn's rings are beautifully lit here. This is part of a larger mosaic image that includes most of Saturn and it will be released at a later date. This image, of course, is a reminder of the photograph taken by Voyager 1 in 1990, made particularly famous by Sagan's reflection on The Pale Blue Dot.

But while we are on the subject of our humbling experiences, I want to point out that Bradley Manning, the source behind the Wikileaks documents, is now going through his court martial. That he leaked the documents is not in doubt, and he has already pleaded to offenses that can place him in jail for 20 years. However, the judge refused to drop the highly dubious charge of aiding and abetting the enemy, and that is a shame.

Why do I bring up Bradley Manning in a post about this image? I recently watched a fantastic documentary, We Steal Secrets: The Story of Wikileaks directed by Alex Gibney. One half of the film focuses on Julian Assange. But the more interesting part of the film talks about Bradley Manning, his background and why he leaked the documents. And guess what? One of his inspirations was Sagan's reflections on the Pale Blue Dot. He did not like what the US government was doing in Iraq (and in other parts of the world) and he wanted to make public some of the horrendous actions of the government (for example, the first leaked video showed a US operation in Iraq in 2008 that killed a Reuters journalist)  in the hopes of  making this a better planet.

Once you have appreciated the above image, do check out We Steal Secrets and follow the ongoing trial of Bradley Manning. His is a heartbreaking story, and it is unconscionable that he was placed in a solitary confinement and forced to sleep naked in a small cell for almost a year - a treatment that the UN special rapporteur on torture found "cruel, inhuman and degrading".

I will leave you with Sagan's voice more directly:


The Pale Blue Dot - Carl Sagan from David Beaver on Vimeo.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

There is a lot going on Egypt right now and much of it is deeply troubling. Yesterday, I had a chance to have a conversation with Mohammed Yahia, the editor of Nature Middle East. He lives in Cairo and, inHouse of Wisdom blog. I don't want to spoil the interview, but I do want to say that he represents the new generation of young, dynamic, and electronically connected Egyptians, and is wonderfully eloquent about the hopes and fears regarding the future of his country. As per the complexity, he participated in anti-Mubarak rallies, then he voted for Morsi (not in support of the Muslim Brotherhood, but to keep the military backed candidate out of power), participated in anti-Morsi rally, and feels that the current army crackdown on Muslim Brotherhood counterproductive. Hope some of this complexity comes out in our conversation.
addition to his day job, he has been actively participating in political demonstrations of the past two years. I first met him in December, 2010 (about 2 months before the Jan 25th overthrow of Mubarak) and we had a great conversation about the political situation in Egypt at the time. I wanted to get his take on the current political situation as well as the status of science projects in Egypt. He also runs the wonderful

Here is the video of our conversation (about 30 minutes long):

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

I'm catching up on back issues of Science and Nature. Here is the news story about the concerns of a nuclear medical reactor in Iran. Now, I have said this multiple times - but here it is again. Nuclear weapons are, of course, awful and should not be pursued by any nation (see . At the same time, it is hypocritical of nuclear powers to place their opposition to Iranian nuclear program in any sort of ethical/moral or even security context. This is particularly true of the US, which has increased its funding for nuclear weapon facilities just this current year (see the link in this earlier post).

Here is a piece from Science (Jun 21st):

If all goes to plan, Iran next year will switch on a facility that gives nuclear nonproliferation analysts goose bumps: the Arak heavy water reactor in the central province of Markazi. Iranian officials have long stated that a chief aim of the fission reactor, known as the IR-40, is to make radioisotopes for medicine. But it also will yield something far more troubling: about 10 kilograms of plutonium a year, enough for one or two atomic bombs. 

Locked in a standoff with the United States and allies over its nuclear ambitions, Iran has steadfastly averred that the objectives of its sprawling nuclear program are peaceful: to generate electricity and produce radioisotopes for industry and medicine. But what if Iran didn't need the controversial IR-40 to make medical isotopes? A new report by nuclear specialists highlights that possibility, laying out alternatives that avoid uranium and production of plutonium, the fissile material in nuclear bombs. 

Medical isotopes are a ripe topic for diplomacy. In remarks on 17 June reported by Fars News Agency, Iran's President-elect, moderate cleric Hassan Rouhani, said that his nation is prepared to "increase transparency" of its nuclear program and "enhance mutual confidence [-building] between Iran and other countries." One confidence-building measure, diplomats say, might be expanding medical isotope production via ways that don't facilitate making bombs. If U.S. negotiators "can sell the idea of Iran participating in advanced nuclear technologies [that steer clear of fissile material], then maybe you've got something," says Mark Jansson, special projects director at the Federation of American Scientists in Washington, D.C. 

Radioisotopes are widely used in medical imaging and cancer treatment. Considered a dividend of nuclear technology, they were an important reason that nuclear powers in the 1950s and 1960s promoted the construction of research reactors around the world. However, many medical isotopes are made in reactors that use highly enriched uranium (HEU), which contains at least 20% of the fissile isotope uranium-235 (U-235)—enough to be "weapons ready." So arms control advocates are loath to see HEU-powered reactors spread, and have successfully shut down some located in unstable regions. 

In Iran, technicians already make medical isotopes in an aging reactor that uses uranium enriched to 19.75% U-235—a hair below bomb-grade. The IR-40 would replace that reactor, but use natural uranium, which is mostly U-238, and not HEU. That worries arms control specialists because bombarding natural uranium with neutrons turns out to be a very efficient way to generate plutonium. 

Several alternative methods of generating desired medical isotopes would make it harder for would-be proliferators to lay hands on weapon-grade fissile material, argues the 13 June report from the Center for Science, Technology, and Security Policy of AAAS (publisher of Science). The technical approaches include an expanded reliance on cyclotrons or spallation neutron sources. High demand for short-lived isotopes used in positron emission tomography, coupled with technical advances in miniaturizing accelerators, has driven down costs. "Accelerator technology is far less expensive and more capable than in the past," write authors Derek Updegraff and Seth A. Hoedl, analysts at AAAS.                  
...
If nonproliferation is the objective, cost may not be a showstopper. In the wake of last week's Iranian elections, U.S. officials hope to revive nuclear talks, which broke down in April. Rouhani, a former nuclear negotiator in Iran's talks with the West, has not signaled any major policy shift. And the window for a deal on IR-40 may be closing. After Iran has spent 10 years planning the facility, "it will be hard to convince them to walk away" from the reactor, Jansson predicts. But proliferation risks could be reduced, he notes, by fueling it with low-enriched uranium, which would yield less plutonium. 

Whatever happens with IR-40, the long-term implications of alternative isotope technology are broader than Iran, says Pierce Corden, a disarmament expert and visiting scholar at AAAS who initiated work on the report. "There may be other problematic situations in the future," he says.                   

Read previous posts on Iran's nuclear program:
Boneheaded US sanctions on reviewing Iranian science manuscripts
The Sacred Value of Iranian Nukes
Scientists must speak up against assassinations of scientists
Oped on Iran's nuclear program
A photo-tour of an Iranian nuclear plant
More restrictions for Iranian-born scientists - The Dutch edition

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

The Egyptian coup was already bad. Yes, Morsi's actions were getting worse by the day and there were extraordinary (really extraordinary!) protests out in the streets. Nevertheless, military's intervention dials back the clock - even when backed by the public. In Pakistan we have seen such coups and none of them have ended well in the long run. Just to make things just a bit worse, the army has arrested the head of the Muslim Brotherhood along with Morsi's aides, has shut down television stations owned by the Brotherhood, and has opened fire on pro-Morsi protestors. One positive action was that the announcement of Morsi's overthrow was accompanied with the sight of disenfranchised minority leaders standing along side the general. But this may turn out to be a fig leaf if the army stays in power or if it pulls strings from behind the scenes to keep Muslim Brotherhood from political participation. I'm not a fan of Brotherhood politics, but their participation in the electoral process is essential. Lets see how things shape up and wishing well to our friends in Egypt.

In the mean time, here are a few articles on the current Egyptian situation (also for broader context, see this lecture by John Calvert that I posted a few weeks ago on the history and politics of the Muslim Brotherhood).

Good Articles:
Downfall in Cairo by Marc Lynch in Foreign Policy (tip Amel Ahmed) (you will probably need a subscription to access it):

Nobody should celebrate a military coup against Egypt's first freely elected president, no matter how badly he failed or how badly they hate the Muslim Brotherhood. Turfing out Morsy will not come close to addressing the underlying failures that have plagued Egypt's catastrophic transition over the last two and a half years. The military's intervention is an admission of the failure of Egypt's entire political class, and those now celebrating already probably know that they could soon rue the coup. 

This new uprising certainly upends what U.S. policymakers considered to be their best efforts to support a shaky democratic transition. Few in Washington are sorry to see Morsy go. But few believe that this process, a mass uprising culminating in a military coup, will restore stability or lead to a more democratic outcome. The Muslim Brotherhood performed atrociously in power, but the real problem was always the weakness and illegitimacy of the political institutions. If the coup and uprising solve the first at the expense of the second, then the political reset will fail....What now? There remains a very real, urgent risk of major violence and further political or even state collapse, of course. But even if the worst is avoided, Egypt faces a real risk of becoming trapped in an endless loop of failed governments, military interventions, and popular uprisings. The very idea of democratic legitimacy has taken a severe beating, and the coming constitutional reforms and new elections will not pass easily. Building real consensus behind genuinely democratic institutions has to remain the guiding light for U.S. policy and the Egyptian political class, no matter how difficult this appears. 

That means finally establishing political rules and institutions that can end the pervasive uncertainty and fear that have dominated the entire transition. Egypt's transition has been profoundly handicapped by the absence of any settled, legitimate rules of the game or institutional channels to settle political arguments. The procedural and substantive legitimacy of every step in the transition has been deeply contested, from the initial March 2011 constitutional referendum through the constitutional assembly and elections. The Supreme Constitutional Court's dissolution of parliament on the eve of the presidential election left the new government with no legitimate legislative branch other than the weak Shura Council for which few had bothered to vote.

On a more pessimist side, here is Shadi Hamid in NYT, Demoting Democracy in Egypt: 

 The Brotherhood’s fall will have profound implications for the future of political Islam, reverberating across the region in potentially dangerous ways. One of the most important political developments of recent years was the decision of Islamist parties to make peace with democracy and commit to playing by the rules of the political game. Leaders counseled patience to their followers. Their time would come, they were told. 

Now supporters of the Brotherhood will ask, with good reason, whether democracy still has anything to offer them. Mr. Morsi’s removal will breathe new life into the ideological claims of radicals. Al Qaeda and its followers have long argued that change can’t come through the democracy of “unbelievers”; violence is the only path. As the Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri once said, “What is truly regrettable is the rallying of thousands of duped Muslim youth in voter queues before ballot boxes instead of lining them up to fight in the cause of Allah.” 

Al Qaeda’s intellectual forebears emerged in the 1950s and 1960s, and were shaped by events that bear an eerie similarity to those of this week. In 1954, a popularly backed Egyptian Army moved against the Muslim Brotherhood, arresting thousands and dismantling the organization. Prison had a radicalizing effect on Sayyid Qutb, a leading Brotherhood ideologue, who experienced torture at the hands of his captors before being executed in 1966. Many of Mr. Qutb’s followers later left the Brotherhood’s embrace and went their own way, setting up militant organizations that would begin perpetrating acts of terrorism. 

In 1954, no one could have guessed that the brutal crackdown against the Brotherhood would set in motion a chain of events that would have terrible consequences for the region and America. 

The events of this week could have similarly profound implications. In the hours after Mr. Morsi’s ouster, the new military leadership suspended the Constitution, shut down at least three Islamist television stations, and, more ominously, issued arrest warrants for at least 300 Brotherhood members. Prominent liberal voices are calling for “dissolving” the Brotherhood and holding what would amount to dubious show trials.

Also see For Islamists, Dire Lessons on Politics and Power.          

In the mean time, here is an article in the NYT arguing in favor of the coup: A Coup, but Backed by the People by Sara Khorshid: 

Yes, this is a military coup. But without people power, no change could have taken place. I hold on to a hope that Egyptians have learned a lesson from the past two and a half years, that they will ensure that this new “transitional period” will be a time for laying the groundwork for true democracy. 

We must avoid the sort of vague legal roadmap established by the military after Mr. Mubarak’s departure, which left us in constant dispute over the allocation of powers among the branches of government. That plan was supported by the Muslim Brotherhood because it helped them take power. And the military temporarily aligned itself with the Brotherhood because it was then the most powerful political force. 

I hope that the military has sided with the people this time because it has realized that the people are the more powerful force. One priority now is to oppose any violation of the rights of Brotherhood members and their families. 

Am I certain that this second round will lead Egypt to true democracy? No. But whoever rules Egypt next will be aware of the fate of rulers who lose the faith and support of the Egyptians. 

We are back at square one. We have paid a high price for it the past two and a half years, but democracy is worth it.

Here is an article that looks at the future of the Muslim Brotherhood - Where Does the Muslim Brotherhood Go From Here: Reckoning with Morsi's Failure by Nathan Brown in The New Republic (tip from Leyla Keough): 

In studying Islamist movements over the last decade, I generally found that the most rewarding time to speak to leaders was about a year or so after an election. During the heat of the political battle, they made decisions like most politicians do (on the fly, often overreacting to yesterday’s headlines) and spoke like most politicians do (providing glib spin than reflective analysis). But at calmer moments, they spoke less like politicians and more openly. And there was a reason why: The movements prided themselves (justifiably) on an ability to learn. 

Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and its sister organizations represent the most successful non-governmental organizations in Arab history. No other movements have been able to sustain, reinvent, and replicate themselves over so much time and space. And there are two secrets to that success: a tight-knit organizational structure that rewards loyalty and the ability to adjust and adapt. 

And those two features led to the experiment with political Islam that is now in such grave crisis. The organizational tightness of the Brotherhood made it more able than any other potential opposition force to organize for campaigns: In many countries, they were the only political party worthy of the name (even in places where they were banned from calling themselves a party). And their adaptability allowed them to take advantages of the cracks and openings that appeared in Arab authoritarian orders over the past few decades.
When the uprisings of 2011 occurred, the Egyptian Brotherhood had become sufficiently adept at the political game that it hit the ground running far faster than any possible competitor. And the organization had also evolved over the past couple decades to place politics at the center of its agenda. Founded as a general reform movement that carried out charity, self-improvement, education, mutual assistance, preaching, and politics, the Brotherhood had become a primarily political creature. 

But just as its political project seemed poised to realize full success, it suddenly and ignominiously collapsed. The immediate reaction among its members will be to complain that the Brotherhood was cheated. And in a sense it was, but complaint will not substitute for reflection forever. What will be the movement’s more studied reaction? In a conversation two months ago with a Brotherhood leader Amr Darrag, I made a bold prediction that in ten years, the organization will regret having sought the Egyptian presidency in 2012. He politely disagreed. In retrospect we were both wrong: The regret will likely set in over the next several months.
...
Which lesson will the Brotherhood learn, and how will it apply them? The organization first needs some time to think, and it is not yet clear how the disparate coalition that has destroyed the Morsi presidency will react to the Brotherhood’s continued role. In this respect, it would be wise for those who are now victorious in Egypt to remember that the issue is not only what the Brotherhood learns; the issue is also what Islamists are taught.

Bad and Ugly articles: 

But hold on. We can't leave here without pointing out two articles that fall under the category of Bad and Ugly: 

Here is David Brooks in NYT that defends the coup and uses a broad brush for the entire region: 

It’s no use lamenting Morsi’s bungling because incompetence is built into the intellectual DNA of radical Islam. We’ve seen that in Algeria, Iran, Palestine and Egypt: real-world, practical ineptitude that leads to the implosion of the governing apparatus. 

The substance people are right. Promoting elections is generally a good thing even when they produce victories for democratic forces we disagree with. But elections are not a good thing when they lead to the elevation of people whose substantive beliefs fall outside the democratic orbit. It’s necessary to investigate the core of a party’s beliefs, not just accept anybody who happens to emerge from a democratic process. 

This week’s military coup may merely bring Egypt back to where it was: a bloated and dysfunctional superstate controlled by a self-serving military elite. But at least radical Islam, the main threat to global peace, has been partially discredited and removed from office.

Oh and of course, they are inhabit a culture of death (talk about quote mining and ignoring the long history):

It has become clear — in Egypt, Turkey, Iran, Gaza and elsewhere — that radical Islamists are incapable of running a modern government. Many have absolutist, apocalyptic mind-sets. They have a strange fascination with a culture of death. “Dying for the sake of God is more sublime than anything,” declared one speaker at a pro-Morsi rally in Cairo on Tuesday. 

As Adam Garfinkle, the editor of The American Interest, put it in an essay recently, for this sort of person “there is no need for causality, since that would imply a diminution of God’s power.” This sort of person “does not accept the existence of an objective fact separate from how he feels about it.” 

But wait. The title of the ugliest article goes to the Wall Street Journal. The article (is it an editorial?) uses Chilean dictator Pinochet as a positive example for Egypt! No seriously. Here is the last paragraph from After the Coup in Cairo: 

Egyptians would be lucky if their new ruling generals turn out to be in the mold of Chile's Augusto Pinochet, who took power amid chaos but hired free-market reformers and midwifed a transition to democracy. If General Sisi merely tries to restore the old Mubarak order, he will eventually suffer Mr. Morsi's fate.

There you have it folks. Egypt will be lucky if it gets its own set of the Disappeared. What rubbish!

In any case, hope these will give some sense of the happenings in Egypt.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

It is a shame that the Obama administration is getting dirtier and dirtier. Just today, the NSA chief James Clapper, admitted to lying to the Congress. If this was being done by George W. Bush, liberals in the US would have been out in the streets protesting. But when 'our own' guy is doing this - and worse - then it is justified that he must have had good reason to take this action. In many ways, this is what has made Obama administration far more damaging for civil liberties. Now it also seems clear that the US will go to any lengths to make an example of any whistleblowers.  Shamefully, now France, Portugal, and possibly Italy are complicit in it as well - as the plane of Bolivian President was diverted to Austria on the suspicion that Snowden was onboard (France, Portugal and Italy blocked their airspace). This is bullying of the highest degree. How come I'm missing the Cold War?

In the mean time, here is a talk by Glenn Greenwald from a few days ago. The last part of the talk is important where he discusses the nature of coverage of the Snowden Affair in major news sources. Not explicitly mentioned in his talk, but this complicity of news organizations and the White House was what created the false case for the Iraq war and is now being used for drumming up anti-Iranian sentiments as well. The talk is worth watching (just be warned of a very enthusiastic intro - but then it is  interesting, including opening remarks by investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill  - who recently made the documentary, Dirty Wars):



Also, here is a segment from Chris Hayes on MSNBC on the coverage of leaks by journalists. It is also worth watching (about 9 minutes long):

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

The unrest in Turkey continues. I have two articles below. The first one deals looks beyond the usual secular-religious divide when discussing Turkey, and the second looks at the role of social identity in the formation of attitudes towards Turkish foreign policy. First here is an article by Ateş Altınordu on The Immanent Frame:

Does the actual picture of Occupy Gezi confirm the existence of a deep fault line between secular and religious citizens that Erdoğan and the New York Times alike posit? It is true that most religious-conservative citizens are not participating in Occupy Gezi, and it is rather safe to assume that many maintain their support for the AKP and for Erdoğan himself. However, there are many significant crosscurrents that complicate this picture. First, Occupy Gezi brings together many different groups, including Kemalists, liberal-minded secular citizens, environmentalists, revolutionary socialists, anarchists, feminists, LGBT groups, highly politicized activists, and young people who simply oppose police brutality and the government’s authoritarian policies. As opposed to what Erdoğan has repeatedly implied, Occupy Gezi is fundamentally different from the Republican Rallies of 2007, which were organized by militant secularist organizations and aimed to prepare the ground for a military coup against the AKP government. While Kemalist groups may chant “we are the soldiers of Mustafa Kemal” during the demonstrations, calls for the military to intervene in the political process are hardly ever heard. Moreover, all participants in the movement seem to share a general respect for religious citizens.
On June 4, the day after newspapers close to the AKP started to advance Erdoğan’s agenda by depicting Occupy Gezi as an anti-religious movement, movement participants announced that alcohol should not be consumed on the park’s premises that day as a sign of respect for the Miraç Kandili, a Muslim holiday commemorating the prophet’s ascent to heaven. Throughout the day, volunteers offered thousands of traditional kandil bagels to anyone entering the park. 

More importantly, while constituting a minority in the movement, many pious Muslims, AKP voters, and some Islamic organizations have participated in the protests. One social justice-oriented Islamic group in particular, Anti-Capitalist Muslims, has been part of the campaign against the destruction of the park from the very beginning and has a major presence in the movement.

And here is the broader outlook:

The liberation theology of the Anti-Capitalist Muslims shows that it is difficult to categorize the religious circles in Turkey as a single, uniform bloc under the unbreakable spell of Erdoğan’s AKP. The same is true for secular people, many of whom have learned to respect the religious practices of their fellow citizens, including their right to wear headscarves in public institutions. The transformative potential that emerges from the respectful coexistence of different political orientations and social groups in Occupy Gezi should not be underestimated, both in the park and in the movement more broadly. As soccer fans who use homophobic epithets in their slogans against Erdoğan are learning from the LGBT groups in the park why this is problematic, and as many Turks in the movement increasingly seem to empathize with the Kurds now that they are also experiencing indiscriminate police violence and witnessing the indifference of the mainstream media, a transformation is likewise taking place in the relationship between secular and religious citizens who together protest the authoritarian policies of the government and the violent practices of the police. The careful respect that the mostly secular participants in the movement exhibited on Miraç Kandili, voluntarily giving up drinking in public—although they vigorously defend their right to drink in public—and Eliaçık’s statement of solidarity with alcohol drinkers are manifestations of this rapprochement. 

What is happening within the confines of the Gezi Park has its limits, of course, in terms of its wider ramifications, but it is indicative of larger political learning processes in a society increasingly suffering from the authoritarian tendencies of the government, Erdoğan’s paternalistic style of rule, and the disproportionate use of force by the police against groups as diverse as soccer fans, university students, and environmental activists.

Read the full article here.

Here is an interesting article in the latest issue of International Journal of Middle East Studies: Social Identity and Attitudes toward Foreign Policy: Evidence from a Youth Survey in Turkey by Sabri Ciftci (you probably will need subscription to access the full article). Here is the abstract:

This paper focuses on the relationship between social identity based on national, religious, or international affiliations and attitudes toward foreign policy in the Turkish context. Evidence is drawn from an original survey conducted among university students in Turkey. The results show that students' social identity has a significant correlation with their perceptions of foreign policy. Most Turkish university students provide conditional support for the new directions in Turkey's foreign policy, but those with an Islamic identity appear to be more supportive of the Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi's (Justice and Development Party) policies. Most university students believe that Turkey's future lies in the European Union and the Central Asian Turkic republics rather than in the Middle East. Overall, the perceptions of educated youth toward foreign policy are shaped by both social identity and their conceptions of national interest.

His sample of 800 university students from Cumhuriyet University in central Turkey span a broad spectrum of political, ethnic, and religious identities.   So couple of things I wanted to highlight. First, it seems that less than half of these students think that Turkey should be a member of the EU:

Second, this is how these students define themselves in terms if their national and international identity:

But when you look at their perceptions of Turkey's future, most of them see it in terms of EU and/or the  Turkic Republics:

Ciftci concludes this part of the results as follows:

Moving beyond these general perceptions, the young and educated segment of the Turkish electorate believes that Turkey's future lies in the EU or the Turkic republics. Only a small fraction of the respondents has an orientation toward the Middle East or the Islamic world. It appears that individuals develop attitudes differently about the goals and the future of foreign policy. When it comes to the former, most educated youth appear to emphasize foreign policy strategies that are more in line with a nationalistic perception of state identity. This view is compatible with Davutoğlu's strategic depth approach, which favors a multidimensional policy exploiting multiple identities. Since Davutoğlu has implemented his foreign policy vision as Turkish foreign minister, the finding shows that university students carry orientations that are in line with this theoretically inspired policy framework. Furthermore, students' orientations appear to be in line with the scholarly approach explaining foreign policy activities with notions such as balance of power, geopolitics, and economic interests rather than with accounts describing the new directions in Turkish foreign policy as an axis shift or Middle Easternization.

This paper was published before the Gezi protests. Nevertheless, it provides an interesting window into the identity perceptions of Turkish university students.

_________________
Ceftci, S. (2013), Social Identity and attitudes toward foreign policy: Evidence from a youth survey in Turkey, International Journal of Middle East Studies / Volume 45 / Issue 01 / February 2013, pp 25-43. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0020743812001249

Read More »