LCCC ENGLISH NEWS BULLETIN
October 19/06
Biblical Reading For today
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 10,1-9.
After this the Lord appointed seventy (-two) others whom he sent ahead of him in pairs to every town and place he intended to visit.
He said to them, "The harvest is abundant but the laborers are few; so ask the master of the harvest to send out laborers for his harvest.
Go on your way; behold, I am sending you like lambs among wolves. Carry no money bag, no sack, no sandals; and greet no one along the way.Into whatever house you enter, first say, 'Peace to this household.' If a peaceful person lives there, your peace will rest on him; but if not, it will return to you.Stay in the same house and eat and drink what is offered to you, for the laborer deserves his payment. Do not move about from one house to another. Whatever town you enter and they welcome you, eat what is set before you, cure the sick in it and say to them, 'The kingdom of God is at hand for you.'
Special Interview
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: The UNIFIL Mandate Does Not Stipulate Disarming Hizbollah-Ghassan Charbel Al-Hayat - 19.10.06
Free Opinion
Lebanon needs an empowered Parliament to drive change -Daiy Star 19.10.06
The General's Accountability-By: Elias Harfoush Al-Hayat Dar Al-Hayat 19.10.06
Israel Attacks Lebanon: The Big Picture-By: Roger Owen - Al-Hayat 19.10.06
Christian migration from Mid-East at heart of patriarch's .AsiaNews.it - Italy
No religion or civilization has a monopoly on reason -By Asma Afsaruddin 19.10.06
Latest New from the daily Star for October 19/06
Berri says consensus necessary for unity government
Lebanese Army dismantles Israeli pipes
Rain, wind lend urgency to ordnance cleanup
Senior jurist boycotts interview for post on Constitutional Council
A letter to Lebanon
Sfeir discusses appointments with judge
Tohme reassures displaced that troubles are almost over
Scuffle breaks out between students from rival political factions
US envoy pledges 'strong commitment'Lebanese Customs acquires mobile X-ray technology
Lebanon's economy is down but not out - report
Latest New from miscellaneous sources for October 19/06
Israeli Ambassador to Spain: Hizbullah Still Armed Thanks to Syria-Naharnet - Beirut,Lebanon
Army Rejects Israeli Claims of Weapons Smuggling from Syria-Naharnet
Shouf Committee Demands Equal Rights for Refugees-Naharnet
Italy's Parliament Approves Lebanon Peacekeeping Mission-Naharnet
UNIFIL Reportedly to Fire at Israeli Jets Flying Over Lebanon-Naharnet
Report: Investigation in Bombing, Rocket Attacks Has Made 'Good Progress'-Naharnet
Arab League Chief Amr Moussa Pledges Joint Arab Drive to Rebuild Lebanon-NaharnetUNIFIL Reportedly to Fire at Israeli Jets Flying over Lebanon-Naharnet
Lebanon Premier Asks Arab States For Rebuilding Aid-New York Sun
Business, family ties rule on Syria-Lebanon border-Reuters.uk
Syria arming Hezbollah: Israel-Peninsula On-line
Lebanon denies reports that arms are being smuggled in from Syria-Monsters and Critics.com
Lebanon Premier Asks Arab States For Rebuilding Aid
By HUSSEIN DAKROUB - Associated Press
October 18, 2006
BEIRUT, Lebanon — Prime Minister Siniora appealed to Arab countries yesterday to increase and accelerate their donations to Lebanon to help it rebuild from what he called "a series of devastating Israeli invasions" in the past 30 years.
Addressing a meeting of Arab finance ministers, Mr. Siniora called for a quick infusion of Arab funds to enable Lebanon to recover from the 34-day Israeli offensive against Hezbollah in July and August, and the civil war of 1975–90. Mr. Siniora said the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas had inflicted a heavy loss of life and colossal damage to Lebanon's infrastructure. "The Lebanese have paid a heavy price in lives and properties as a result of this devastating war. Also, nearly a quarter of Lebanon's population was displaced from their homes during the [Israeli] aggression.Direct and indirect economic losses reached billions of dollars," Mr. Siniora told the Arab League's Economic and Social Council. Lebanon says it needs about $3.5 billion to repair buildings and infrastructure damaged in the Israeli offensive.But even before this year's destruction, Lebanon was saddled with a public debt of about $38 billion — most of which stemmed from the costs of reconstruction from the civil war
Israel Attacks Lebanon: The Big Picture
Roger Owen Al-Hayat - 18/10/06//
Now that the Israeli assault on Lebanon is over, at least for the time being, what have we learned? One thing is immediately clear. Israel's efforts to use airpower to control a territory that it once occupied failed miserably particularly as far as finding and destroying the Hizbullah rockets are concerned. Nevertheless, if and when the cease-fire breaks down, it will almost certainly try a revised version again, witness its efforts to seek and destroy the Hamas rockets fired from Gaza since the Israeli troops withdrew.
Beyond that, Israel's Lebanese incursion provides an opportunity to test two competing explanations put forward to account for its particular intensity. The first is that it represents a straight contest between Israel and Hizbullah, one which both sides had a strong interest in fighting for their own particular reasons at this particular time. The second, put forward strongly in the United States, is that both were acting as proxies in the much larger fight between America and Iran for power and influence in the Middle East.
That there was some sharing of interests between Israel and the United States and Israel, on the one hand, and Hizbullah and Iran on the other is incontestable. Given President Bush's obsession with the war on terror there is no doubt that the Israeli's could rely on receiving the green light from Washington for their offensive. Similarly Hizbullah could be sure of support from Teheran for daily rocket attacks which suggested, without actually having to prove, that it had weapons powerful enough to hit Tel Aviv.
But this is not the same as to say both started their military activities at the behest of their great power patrons. In Israel, a neophyte government, which was having difficulty in persuading its people of the rightness of Ariel Sharon's decision to withdraw from Gaza, jumped at the opportunity provided by the kidnapping of two of its soldiers on the northern border to assert a military, and in particular, an aerial strength, which, it was assured by its generals, it now possessed. Hizbullah, too, had every interest in demonstrating a proven power to inflict casualties on its Israeli enemies.
It is equally true, I would argue, that, after the cease fire both sides have similar interests in preserving their freedom of action. Israel has no interest in acting as Bush's Middle Eastern front-line agent in his war on terror. While Hizbullah now has an even more important role in Lebanese domestic politics which it must cement in the usual way by creating and preserving local political alliances in the usual way.
Why then the concentrated emphasis on the notion that this was not a real fight but a proxy one? Here I would suggest that, in America at least, much of the force came from the remaining neo-Conservatives who, seeing America's power and influence slipping away in Iraq, believed that the tension along the Israeli/Lebanese border provided a last chance for the United States to re-make the Middle East by a concerted campaign against both Syrian and Iranian influence. This they did partly by trying to give the impression that Hizbullah represented what was, in effect, an Iranian division poised to strike at the heart of a major American ally, partly by using the occasion to stress the need to find ways to pressure Iran into making concessions over the nuclear and other issues. There even seemed to be a moment when attempts to promote regime change in Teheran seemed to have been placed, once again, on the Washington table.
If correct, the implications of Israel's military failure in Lebanon are enormous. Once again, the use of force will be seen to have failed to transform into political influence on the ground. Once again, Iran has emerged looking stronger rather than weaker. Once again, efforts to frighten Syria into detaching itself from its Iranian alliance will be seen to have had the reverse effect of simply strengthening that alliance. For those who want to see Israel as America's proxy in all this, the failure can only be seen as that much worse.
Just as important, Israeli failure also open up the prospects for a serious exploration of alternative ways of addressing the Middle East's many problems. For those who recognise that Iran cannot be beaten into submission, one that is beginning to receive increasing attention is former secretary of state, Henry Kissinger's notion of a 'grand bargain' in which Iran is presented with a whole package of across the board ideas designed to solve all, or almost all, of the outstanding problems between it and the United States in one go.
There is also talk of a second strategy which would be to engage in a systematic address of those issues by which failed American policies have actually helped to strengthen rather than weaken the Iranian position. One, obviously, is the failed intervention in Iraq. And, a second, the ways in which the attempt to isolate Syria has encouraged stronger ties between Damascus and Teheran. Finally, there is the ongoing situation in Palestine in which Israeli policies, aided and abetted by the United States, provide powerful ammunition for Iran, Hizbullah and all the other forces claiming to be in a position to confront the Israeli state. What has been singularly lacking is more than a passing mention of oil, oil prices, oil security, and the perceived need, by some at least, to confront Chinese and Indian competition for Middle Eastern oil. Here perhaps is one area where the Bush administration sees the need for cooperation with its Middle Eastern oil-producing allies rather than confrontation. Where oil might come in, though, is with respect to Iran where American sanctions, imposed for political not economic reasons, are very obviously at odds with Teheran's own attempts to increase exploration, to up-grade its technology, and, in general, to bring output back to pre-revolutionary levels. Here too more talk of talk and less of war would certainly be a very good thing.*Original English
The General's Accountability
Elias Harfoush Al-Hayat - 17/10/06//
In other circumstances, Michel Aoun could have been able to give his speech on the anniversary of his exile from Baabda Palace somewhere else; especially in France, where he was exiled. However, the Spring events of last year, which brought about a new political reality in Lebanon, allowed Aoun to return to Beirut Airport on May 7, 2005, and appear for the first time before his supporters, 'on a painful anniversary', as he described.
But the General, who chose to stay away from accountability and rubbing salt in the wounds of those who were behind his deportation from his country for 16 years, could not provide accountability to the people of his homeland, who are politically opposed to him. That is because they are supported by an imaginary majority that may not allow him to reach the desired end: the Presidency of the Republic.
For this end, the General seems ready to ignore a painful era that afflicted Lebanon. He was, in fact, a key player in that era. It witnessed two wars: one with the Lebanese and one with the Syrian forces. They only had one destructive objective: first, to destroy General Aoun's project (the restoration of sovereignty and free decision-making), and second, the reconstruction of the country. This is what has already happened. The 'Syrian mandate' (which the General called 'occupation' when he was in Paris) has been extended for another 16 years. Lebanon witnessed two presidents, during whose terms in office, the Lebanese decision was mostly governed by unavoidable external considerations and circumstances.
Aoun did not lose the Liberation War in 1990 by accident. Every average observer of the events in the region at the time was aware of the inevitability of the end. However, the General counted on elements that only appeared positive to him. These elements included, for example, the popular support around him, which he considered a path to victory and the 'legitimacy' trump card as the president of a transitional government. This card was supposed to be used to prepare for a new presidential term in office through constitutional means.
Although General Aoun prefers opening the files of the past and holding parties accountable, he overlooks this when the matter is related to the era that paved the way for the October 13, 1990 civil war. He also overlooks accountability when it is related to the era that followed July 12 of last year. The General, who is keen on national sovereignty and national independence, has no word to describe the situation in Lebanon now, where the country's land, sea borders and airspace are under international control (not to say blockade), after it had regained its sovereignty over most of its territory: the liberation of the South in 2000, and the withdrawal of Syrian forces last year.
But when it comes to Hezbollah's arms, an issue that is not clear whether it will be included in the 'understanding', the General uses quotes from Hezbollah's statements, and adopts stances of its Secretary General, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, whose Movement considers armament 'temporary' (can you recall the last time this word was used in another situation?) and contingent on the establishment of 'a fair and capable State'. This was said by a military commander, who participated in the 'cancellation war' under the pretext of striking any armed force outside the framework of the Lebanese army, which he was its commander at the time!
Indeed, it is a time of accountability, or should be. Unfortunately, General Aoun and many other politicians are unlucky, because the Lebanese' memory is short and cannot go as far back as 16 years!
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: The UNIFIL Mandate Does Not Stipulate Disarming Hizbollah
Ghassan Charbel Al-Hayat - 18/10/06//
Here is the full text of the interview:
Al-Hayat: Why has Turkey decided to contribute troops to the UNIFIL-II deployed South Lebanon? What guarantees have you got to ensure your soldiers' safety?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: We cannot draw a line between the developments ongoing in Lebanon and Palestine. It all started when an Israeli soldier was first captured in Palestine then two others in Lebanon. Consequently, Israel retaliated with excessive force, which in turn compounded the situation even further. At this, we initiated intense diplomatic contacts with President Mahmoud Abbas, PM Ismail Haniya, and Ehud Olmert in order to settle the first problem in Palestine. With respect to Lebanon, we contacted the Lebanese Premier Fouad Siniora, Olmert, Jack Chirac, as well as the leaders of Germany, Russia, and Britain in attempt to establish peace in the region. By the same token, the Turkish Foreign Minister, Abdullah Gul, visited the region, mainly Israel, Lebanon, and Syria, which gave us a clear picture of the realities there.
In the same vein, we supported the UNSC Resolution both verbally and practically. Our government has even braved the domestically hostile media campaigns in Turkey and decided to dispatch troops to Lebanon. For this reason, we called the Lebanese government, with all its components, including "Hizbollah," as well as Syria and they all welcomed this step. Thus, we decided to help our Lebanese brethren. Besides, the majority of Turkish parliament endorsed this step as means to offer Lebanon humanitarian assistance and establish peace there.
After having sent a naval force to Lebanon, the time has come now for the ground troops and engineers to help their brothers in Lebanon and to promote peace and security in the Middle East.
Al-Hayat: What message would you like to convey to the Lebanese?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: I urge the Lebanese people to view the Turkish soldiers as their brothers. During my talks with PM Fouad Siniora, he told me that our soldiers are guests. So, we are sending you our brothers to help you rebuild your country and safeguard peace. As your guests, the Turkish soldiers will be an example to follow thanks to their good conduct and commendable morals.
We felicitate you on the occasion of Ramadan and Eid Al-Fitr. We ask God Almighty to have mercy on all the war martyrs and offer our sincere condolences to the victims families.
Reinforcing Stability
Al-Hayat: You are a part of the UNIFIL force, established by virtue of the UN Resolution 1701 following the last Israeli aggression against Lebanon. Do you think that this resolution disengages the Lebanese-Israeli border from military conflict?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: We welcome the UNSC Resolution 1701, which, if fully implemented, will consecrate a permanent cease fire and a long-term solution to this conflict. In other words, there is no room for complacence. The international community, the parties to the conflict, and the regional actors must all reinforce the confidence-building measures and forge a viable political framework for a long-term solution, as enshrined in the Resolution 1701.
The Security Council unanimous adoption of the said resolution equally endorsed by the conflicting parties and the regional states, along with the recent developments, such as the deployment of UNIFIL-II in Lebanon are all positive signs proving that peace can be maintained in this region.
I would like to seize this opportunity in order to underline once again that our decision to participate in these troops stem from our active endeavors to reinforce regional stability. Our initiative was welcomed and encouraged by all parties, including Lebanon and Israel. In truth, we will not send combat troops, but units to offer humanitarian assistance, help in the reconstruction process and conduct naval patrols.
Al-Hayat: Various international requests urge Hizbollah to disarm and abandon its weapons. What is your stance? How do you perceive the solution?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: First and foremost, the UNSC Resolution 1701 does not mandate the UNIFIL to disarm Hizbollah. This issue is simply about political integration in Lebanon.
Al-Hayat: How do you foresee the future of Lebanon after the last war and following the assassination of the former Prime Minister Rafic Hariri?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: Turkey strongly supports Lebanon's sovereignty, independence, and political unity. We hope that the winds of change that blew across Lebanon after the withdrawal of all foreign troops will bring about a strong political, economic, and social structure. A plural and democratic Lebanon will be a stabilizing factor in the region and Turkey's important partner.
At this critical stage, the Lebanese government needs to be strengthened so that it can extend its effective control over all the Lebanese territory. We cannot in this regard but hail the Lebanese government for its remarkable performance during the crisis despite all the obstacles it bumped across. For this reason, the Lebanese government needs to preserve this consensus and unity if it really wants to normalize the situation in Lebanon gradually.
Al-Hayat: Rafic Hariri was your friend. Do you expect the probe into his assassination to yield tangible results?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: We hope that the International Investigation Commission will unveil the truth as soon as possible for the investigation cannot be wrapped up with no one accused. It cannot be said that this crime was committed by an unknown! We also hope that this investigation will not turn Lebanon and Syria into enemies, but will, in contrast, open a new page of mutual peace, friendship and cooperation. As we all know, Turkey has crucially helped the investigation when it offered to host the investigation with Syrian officials in the Turkish city of Gaziantep before Geneva was chosen. With no doubt, our proposal has safeguarded the investigation.
Al-Hayat: Does Turkey fear that a potential Iranian-American row would negatively affect the situation in the South? Does the UNIFIl's mandate include disarming Hizbollah?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: We cannot claim that this process is not fraught with risks. Life itself is bristled with dangers. We have already taken the decision and we are fully aware of the ensuing risks. But we have discussed this issue with the US and Iran. We hope that the currently prevailing peace will last, that we won't be embroiled again in violence and death. So far, things appear calm. Turkey will spare no efforts to ensure regional stability. The countries that sent troops to Lebanon, like Germany, Italy, and France all assert that things are back to normal there. In addition, the situation will improve further with the participation of some Islamic and Arab countries, even with small contingents.
Most importantly, the political and religious leaders must, in my opinion, avoid any provocative declarations because the sole victim in this case will be the people.
In addition, the UNIFIL mandate does not include disarming any faction. Our Parliament's authorization in this regard is clear and limited to humanitarian and social services. From the start, we have asserted that the Turkish army will not take part in any disarmament process. No one can oblige to behave differently. Even more, Kofi Annan and Siniora have both confirmed that this mission does not fall under UNIFIL's mandate.
Al-Hayat: Do you anticipate a potential US-Iranian showdown over the nuclear file? What do you recommend?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: The six countries that offered an incentive package to Iran in June, including the US, are now threatening of imposing potential sanctions. Still, they will be open to dialogue with Iran. The essence of the problem is whether Iran will prove to the international community that it pursues its nuclear program for peaceful goals - which is indeed its legitimate right. I still hope this problem will be diplomatically settled. We stand ready to contribute to every effort to this end.
Al-Hayat: Does Turkey fear Iran's mounting role in the region?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: We harbor no concerns in this regard. Every State has the right to strengthen its interests and clout. Turkey too is striving to protect its clout and interests in the region. The point is, Turkey tries to harness its regional weight and power to establish peace and win friends. In other words, Turkey's foreign policy basically intends to win more friends not enemies.
The Confessional War
Al-Hayat: Does Turkey fear the Sunnite-Shiite struggle in the region?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: It is so dangerous, in our opinion, to highlight a potential confessional or even racist war in the region, or even to foment one. Alas, the Iraqi people alone will pay the price of this confessional and racist conflict. In truth, two Muslim brothers cannot fight each other on the basis of confessional differences. As a result, this war will breed no winners but losers.
Al-Hayat: How will Turkey react if we woke up one day to an Iranian-conducted nuclear test?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: (smiling) This is a military question.
Al-Hayat: How do you assess the situation in Iraq? Do you expect it to trigger a civil war?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: Honestly, I believe that the unrelenting security problem, sectarian polarization, corruption, and the failure of the national government to provide basic services dangerously threaten Iraq's political transition and unity. I don't underestimate the current risks unfolding in Iraq. I am quite sure that the consequences of a divided Iraq could be even worse than the currently prevailing situation.
A Launch pad for Terrorism
Al-Hayat: Are you concerned about a potential federal regime in Iraq, especially in Iraqi Kurdistan? Where do you draw your own red line? What would be your response in case Iraqi Kurdistan proceeds toward a full autonomy?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: In my opinion, the Iraqis need to strike a balance between protecting their cultural diversity and Iraq's democratic national unity. Iraq is our sovereign and independent neighbor. The currently enforced Iraqi constitution provides for a federal, united, plural, and democratic Iraq. I see no reason that prevents us from coping with any of these four elements. Most importantly, Iraq must not become a rear base for terrorists to launch their trans-border attacks against the neighboring countries and beyond. That would certainly destabilize the region.
No Intervention in Iraq
Al-Hayat: When can the Turkish army intervene in Iraq? To protect the Turkmen or prevent the establishment of a Kurdish state?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: This issue is not put on our agenda. End 2003, the parliament authorized us to send troops to Iraq - a step that wasn't accomplished since the Iraqis refused our presence in their country and we cannot be present in a country to which we aren't invited. So, we dispatched our troops to Lebanon based on the Lebanese invitation. What worries us the most is the prevailing conditions in Kirkuk. In other words, we are afraid for Iraq and its future and not from it! If Kirkuk's demographic structure was changed, for it to be handed in subsequently to the Kurds, this might open wounds that will not heal easily.
Al-Hayat: Will your ties with Paris be affected by the French Parliament's decision to criminalize any denial of the "Armenian genocide"?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: We have expressed our deep concern for this French step and for the declarations the French President made during his visit to Armenia. In fact, I have received today a phone call from Chirac who voiced his regret. I have told him that he is one of Europe's most experienced and influential leaders. We were annoyed because his MPs, who form the majority in the Parliament, have not attended the vote session. Most importantly, we expect you, as I told him, to use your powers appropriately with respect to that law.
Al-Hayat: How do you asses the outcome of the "war on terror" in light of the US invasion of Iraq?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: Turkey has struggled since 1970s against terrorism requiring a combined effort from all countries. Unfortunately, the international community has only embraced the concept of combating terrorism wherever and by whomsoever committed with a combined international effort after 9/11 and following terrorist attacks. No country is immune to the threat of global terrorism. Thus, all countries must disrupt the financing of terrorism, cooperate fully with other countries in combating terrorism, bring the terrorists before heavy penalty courts without giving them refugee status, prevent active or passive assistance to terrorism-related individuals and groups and finally extradite terrorists if they fail to try then. However, it is true that some countries misuse root-causes issue for condoning terrorism. On the one hand, they condemn terrorism yet they cannot prevent individuals and groups on their territories from supporting terrorism.
On the other hand, it is also true that terrorist activities continue unabated in Iraq despite the intervention of the US and Coalition Forces. For instance, the PKK terrorist organization takes shelter in Northern Iraq and infiltrates into our country to conduct terror acts. For this reason, it is difficult to say that combating terrorism in Iraq is successful.
Failure in Iraq is not an option
Al-Hayat: Do you think that the stances of some neighboring countries aggravated the situation in Iraq?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: To preserve our primary national interests, we need to build a stable and prosperous environment in our immediate geographical proximity. Hence, failure in Iraq is not an option for the international community. Therefore, we actively encourage all Iraq's neighboring countries to play a positive role in these transitional times. To this end, Turkey has spearheaded the meetings the Foreign and Interior ministers from the Iraq's neighboring countries have held.
Al-Hayat: How do you describe the current Syrian-Turkish relations?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: Turkey's relations with Syria have been unstable in the past. Nonetheless, we managed to mend fences over time and to develop a mutually beneficial, long-term, and multi-faceted relationship.
We have a constant dialogue with Syria on the bilateral and regional issues. During the last crisis, for instance, we exchanged views on how to ease the tension. To this end, I visited Syria on August 22, 2006 and tackled this issue along with our growing bilateral relations. In our opinion, engagement rather than isolation is the key word in dealing with Syria. Our experience so far has proved it to be true.
Al-Hayat: How does Turkey make use of its relations with Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA)?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: Turkey has maintained close relations with Israel and the Palestinian Authority since their foundation. Indeed, Turkey was among the first countries to recognize the State of Israel and the first in Europe to recognize the Palestinian Liberation Organization in 1975 and the state of Palestine in 1988. Based on this historical background, our relations have flourished since then.
Thanks to these fruitful relations and to our confidence in both sides, we have actively contributed to the efforts to find a peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
As a matter of fact, the need to strengthen our ties with the Arab-Islamic world, as cited in the D-8 initiative we launched, the incrementally growing trade relations with Arab countries, our increased cooperation with the Arab League, and our active presence in the OIC, do refute these criticisms.
Even more, Turkey's foreign policy towards the Middle East rests on a balanced, impartial, and equal pillar. Consequently, our bilateral relations with a particular country do not impinge on our ties with another state. On the contrary, these relations complement each other, thus contributing to regional cooperation, peace and stability in the Middle East.
The Alliance of Civilizations
Al-Hayat: Have the 9/11 attacks triggered a crisis in the relation between Islam and West?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: It is true that the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the subsequent developments have blurred perceptions on both sides. The rise of "Islamophobia" in the Western societies is one of the major threats and challenges that global peace order faces now. Based on the provocative misperceptions reflected in the irresponsible words the political and religious leaders use, anti-Islamic tendencies have apparently gained momentum in the West after 9/11, which has unfortunately hindered efforts to fend off theories, like clash of civilizations.
Indeed, there are certainly many issues on which the major cultures and belief systems of our day disagree. This is certainly not new. Some of these issues are real and some misperceived. Thus, we must first eliminate the extremists on both sides, extremists who want to create a lasting rift between the West and the Islamic World. For this reason, Turkey is cosponsoring the momentous Alliance of Civilizations initiative in an attempt to forge a comprehensive coalition by establishing a paradigm of mutual respect between civilizations and cultures, one likely to prevent the relations between societies and nations from deteriorating.
Al-Hayat: Are these sensitivities responsible for the intricate hurdles hampering Turkey's EU membership?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: The question is whether Turkey will culturally match the EU. We prefer to look at this issue from another perspective. With a predominantly Muslim population, Turkey is also a secular democratic republic, i.e. the antidote to the clash of civilizations. This is one of the reasons why Turkey's membership to the EU will have global repercussions. Again, we need to forge a Alliance of Civilizations. How can we transcend cultural boundaries to create harmony and tolerance on the one hand then deny on the other Turkey's membership because of its cultural identity? This question needs to be addressed first and foremost to the EU not to Turkey. For our part, we will endeavor to meet Copenhagen criteria. We do not want preferential treatment and we will never accept discrimination.
Moderation and Extremism
Al-Hayat: Do you believe that the Moderate Islam represented by the Turkish model is the solution or do you fear the emergence of a radical Islam following the clashes with the army and the supporters and advocates of a secular state?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: Turkey is a democracy where all citizens enjoy fundamental freedoms. Such freedoms ensure a lively debate on many issues still viewed as taboos elsewhere in the world. Why? It is because Turkey is the only predominantly Muslim country that has a real democracy with all its institutions and checks and balances. In a democracy, issues close to the hearts and minds of voters will be discussed at length so popular consensus can be reached on the way forward.
In the same vein, it is important to note that in the secular Turkish Republic, religion and politics do not mix. There is no ongoing clash within Turkey.
Al-Hayat: How does Turkey reconcile its close relation with the US and its NATO affiliation and its Arab and Muslim policy?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: Turkey faces no problems in this regard. Our close relations with the US, the EU and our membership in NATO are the fundamental pillars of our foreign policy. We also have close relations with the Middle East countries. These are not competing or conflicting relations in any way. On the contrary, they are mutually reinforcing. Turkey's foreign policy has always rested on a multidimensional approach. Strategically located at the epicenter of Eurasia, Turkey will continue to develop and deepen its relations with both the West and the East.
Al-Hayat: How do you assess the current US-Turkish relations?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: In June, the Foreign Ministers announced from Washington, D.C. the "Strategic vision document" serving as a framework to advance the longstanding, strong, and strategic Turkish American partnership. This document came as the outcome of our nearly 60 years of relations and our solidarity.
The United States is our ally, and one of our main partners regarding regional and global policy issues. We also share a unique strategic cooperation. In short, we value this bilateral relation that entails a shared vision and common long-term interests.
Turkey and the United States share the same ideals in their regional and global objectives. Commitment to freedom, democracy, rule of law and market economy all shape our vision of the upcoming world order.
In this unique situation, we have to diversify our means to take up our common challenges and to mutually reinforce each other in various tracks, thereby launching a successful result-oriented structured fruitful dialogue, one that will enable Turkey to convey its sensitivities regarding our region.
Al-Hayat: How do you describe the Turkish-Saudi relations?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: Saudi Arabia is one of the most influential actors in the region. Our mutual interests converge in our active attempts to establish lasting peace and prosperity in the region. As a result, the visit of King Abdullah in August has bolstered the relations.
Al-Hayat: Much has been said about the Turkish role in the aftermath of the Soviet Union collapse. How do you perceive Turkey's regional role?
Recep Tayyib Erdogan: First of all, Turkey plays a pivotal country in the Eurasian area thanks to its geography, history, and modern progressive mentality. Its strategic importance is not due only to its geographical location but comprises other valuable factors like its development level, alliances, as well as political, economic, military, and cultural relations.
Following the end of cold war and the USSR demise, Turkey stood at the center of Eurasia, which gained in the new millennium an increasing geopolitical significance
We are proud of our remarkable relations with the European Asian countries based on sovereignty and mutual benefit. Thanks to our common ethnic, historical and cultural ties with the Eurasian countries, we have cultivated a strong sense of solidarity.
In addition, the region enjoys valuable natural resources. So, benefiting from its geographical location, Turkey mapped out and implemented plans with a view of establishing an energy corridor between the hydrocarbon resources of the Caspian countries and the energy-consuming markets in Europe. The East-West Energy Corridor will not benefit Turkey alone but will contribute through interdependence to the stability and economic welfare of the neighboring countries too.
Turkey plays a pivotal role in facing the threats of 21st century. The repercussions of international terrorism, fed by drug-trafficking, organized crime and all other sorts of illicit wealth spill across the world. Given the vital link between security and stability in Eurasia and the West, the challenges we face today necessitate a multi-dimensional approach, whereby democratic, economic and social reforms must be promoted along with defense and security-related issues. In this vein, Turkey is assisting these countries to become more stable and economically self-sufficient, so that they can eventually fully integrate the international order.
Turkey strives to bring the East and the West closer in every respect - a step we need now more than ever in order to face the growing misperceptions between the East and the West.
* Al-Hayat Translation Unit
The Murderer of MY father
a scanned paper of the terms that Aoun signed with the Syrians is attachedThe Murderer of your father
I'm the son of a brave soldier that was murdered on the so called 13th of October, my father died defending his country Lebanon & his community, my
father was pure like the rest of his brothers in arm that died that
day. My father was a soldier who fought all his life and put his family aside to defend the homes of other families, my father was a SOLDIER and ironically
his very own GENERAL decided that my father's life was over.How? I was raised without my father, I was raised on the principle that General michel aoun was the absolute solution for Lebanon's problems, I was raised on the love of aoun, just like many other Christian families, and it's only rational that this mentality made me forget my principles and follow the ideal general Aoun, even if I did not agree with him or thought he was making a huge mistake, I have always convinced myself that everything he does is right. A few months ago I decided to start a research about Lebanon's war and specifically the so called day of 13 of October to find out how my father died, with every little piece added to the big puzzle I started to see the truth clearer, it's true that the Syrians killed my father but the decision itself was taken by you General Michel Aoun, YOU sacrificed my father's life and tens of others so YOU can
keep your fake credibility. below I have attached a copy of a paper that only exist in two places today, Bkerki and the French Embassy and maybe
Syria, this paper was published in a book a few years ago. On the 12 of October Aoun signed that paper approving all the 9 terms put by Syria, and
one of them is approving President Elias al Hraoui and that aoun's government will resign. It is also a known fact that security responsibles in the
Lebanese Forces party at the time visited aoun few days prior to the Syrian invasion and warned him about an attack being prepared and led by Emile Lahoud against general aoun. but the untouchable general assured his soldiers that nothing of this kind was to happen. I have a few questions to the
invincible general that declared war on many Lebanese fractions and waged a destructive war against Syria, How come A Lebanese Resistance was illegal and you worked on destroying it and now you are the closest and only ally to an Islamic extremists party?
How come that you let 13 of October happen while you could of avoided it, and you ran away to France like the coward you are, and now you are
doing a memorial for the martyrs of that day, how come you are Emile's lahoud only supporter, and only stone that keeps us from removing that syrian
puppet, and most important question for me is why did you take the decision to murder my father? michel aoun, even the mothers and wives of the martyrs of 13 of October released a press release against you. You no longer represent us, from this moment on I blame you for the death of my father. Myself and hundreds others decided to leave your party to join the ranks of the good people such as Elias el Zoghbi and Roger Eddeh. Note that the book Im speaking about is "Al Sadess Wal Sab3oun" you can find that piece of paper in it, Bkerki released it in that book. now tell me who do you trust your church or someone that lied to you constantly?
Lebanon’s Loss: More Than Meets the Eye
By: Mulham Assir
The loss inflicted by the Israeli war on Lebanon is measured in the 1400 people killed, the thousands maimed (with more continuing to be killed and maimed by the hundreds of thousands of cluster bombs left behind), the hundreds of thousands displaced or left homeless, and the wholesale destruction of infrastructure essential to life.
And yet there is even more loss, impossible to put a number to and irreplaceable.
Colonial wars of aggression like the one waged by the US in Iraq or the slow genocide carried out by the Jewish state against the Palestinian people have a more profoundly destructive effect than the most brutal barbarian invasions of old because they aim deeper, into the very soul of the nations under attack.
More than the lethal pounding that levels structures and crushes lives, the attempt to reconfigure “a new Middle East” by first “bombing it into the stone age” attacks the country’s identity, culture and national memory, seen by the aggressor as stubborn obstacles to the new, featureless global order at their command.
Repositories of national identity, culture and collective memory (like the plundered and damaged museums and ancient art of Iraq or the Orient House in Jerusalem from which so many important historical documents were destroyed by the Israelis) sustain national consciousness and a sense of national unity without which a besieged nation under occupation collapses and splinters into chaos, fear and sectarian violence.
In 1982, the Museum of Solidarity with Palestine in Beirut was destroyed by Israeli bombardment and with it priceless works of art perished. In 2002, in one of the many Zionist incursions into the West Bank, the IDF soldiers ransacked the Sakakini Cultural Centre, blasted paintings and sculptures to smithereens and stole the contents of the safe. They also expressed their desire for peace and mutual respect by invading the Palestinian Authority Ministry of Culture offices where they defecated in file cabinets and on copying machines and smeared the walls with faeces.
Israel has been perpetrating these vile acts against the Palestinian culture, its heritage and its symbols since its early days and it did so in Lebanon repeatedly. This time around the occupation was thwarted in Lebanon by the unflinching heroism of the resistance forces, but the severed and jagged nerves of cultural loss are in plain sight, jutting out of the mangled body of the vastly devastated country. Even when it is not “targeted,” the Zionist destruction is never random; it is purposeful: saturation bombing is by definition and intent comprehensive, all-inclusive and annihilating. "Nothing is safe [in Lebanon], as simple as that," Israeli Brig.-Gen. Dan Halutz said.
The number of Lebanese artists who have lost their life’s work as well as their treasured art collections and books in the Zionist bombing orgies is not known at this time. Anecdotal information comes through from time to time serendipitously and their names line up in no particular order, irrespective of the artists’ ages, their religion or place of residence, their styles, or the height of renown previously achieved, They are as diverse as Lebanon itself, yet united, as Lebanon must remain, by one common denominator, that being innocent victims of the Zionist aggression. Here are only a few, listed simply in alphabetical order:
Abir Arbid, Ayman Baalbaki, Fawzi Baalbaki (the father of the artists listed above and below), Saeed Baalbaki, Noor Balooq, Ahmad Bazoun , Suzzane Chacaroun, Youssef Ghazzawi, Izzah Hussian , Abdulla Kahil, Ali Qaessi , Akram Qansou.
Asked to comment on the loss of their work artists are typically reluctant to describe their feelings about it given the tremendous loss in human life and the overall destruction of the country. Yet they acknowledge the intent of cultural genocide behind the devastation, noting (as one did):” They are trying to kill us, not only physically, but spiritually as well, but they will never succeed.”
In an interview for Artenews Youssef Ghazzawi said: “I see this war as one against our art and culture, against our progress and development, a war against humanity. We want to create beauty and they find an excuse to demolish us.”
Youssef Ghazzawi and his wife, Suzanne Chakaroun, lost their entire life’s work (and a considerable library) when their studio was destroyed by Zionist bombardments for the third time (after previous destruction in 1977 and in 1983).
No single artist, no single work encompasses the richness, diversity and depth of the Lebanese national consciousness and culture, which are, however, diminished if bereft of any one of them.
And yet there is more.
The images of some of the lost art survive in digital records, ghostlike and forever refused to the viewer as real art experience, like architectural drawings of long lost marvels of marble and stone. One cannot walk around a digital image, or view it from a different angle. It doesn’t cast a shadow, itself reduced to a shadow, a mere remembrance of a memory loss.
The symbolism of much of Lebanese art, although using its own individual vocabulary of images unique to each individual artist, bears a strong resemblance to that of Palestinian contemporary art. This is not surprising because the realities that inform both as well as the emotions that infuse them relate to similar themes: dignity in the face of humiliation, endurance in adversity, faith in victory against unfavourable odds, and the vitality, beauty, and unconquerable thirst for life of the offshoot that grows in the cracks between hard rocks. They express the same aspirations for freedom from occupation, the strength to prevail against aggression, national identity and pride, thirst for beauty.
The extent of the Lebanese artists’ conscious identification with Palestinian art and the emotional universe of the Palestinian artists varies. It ranges from an acute sense of commonality, of being in the menacing cone of shadow of the Zionist state, to a hope against hope for accommodation and a wishful belief in the potential authenticity of the “progressive” Zionist mantra of “we are two people willed by fate to share the same space if only the extremists on both sides would let us do it peacefully.” The massive and indiscriminate Zionist onslaught on Lebanon, however, has shattered that illusion for many Lebanese artists when they became Gazans overnight.
Lebanon is often described as the noble phoenix that rises again and again out of its ashes, but in Baalbaki’s sculpture installation “Bonjour Wadi Abu Jamil” it is not the mythological phoenix but a real, familiar and banal rooster that is perched on top of a refugee’s bundle of salvaged belongings. The rooster calling the survivor to a new dawn and yet another rebirth is just as much the spirit of Lebanon and now, in the aftermath of the war, it brings to mind the humble and the poor in South Lebanon, the foot soldiers of the resistance forces, who were steadfast, brave and confident, possessed of exemplary sumoud. The Arabic virtue of sumoud is a combination of strength, patience and perseverance for which there is no direct equivalent in English. The Arab language needs this word more than many other languages.
In its own way Baalbaki’s rooster illustrates sumoud as much as Palestinian artist’s Ashraf Fawakhry’s donkey does in “I am Donkey,” although both are that and much more.
These comments are not meant to single out some works and artists; they are simply readily available and largely random examples of Lebanese art that express the indomitable spirit of people whom geography and history have placed in the crosshairs of large and ruthless powers.
There is more to the Israeli destruction of Lebanon than meets the eye. There is more, which is tragically forever lost to the eye.
Not too long ago Ahmad Bazoun reminded his colleagues that it was the savage, unspeakable destruction of a whole Spanish Basque village that inspired Picasso to create his most famous work, Guernica, so that the memory of it will never be lost. What artists, he asked in effect, could remain unmoved by the sight of the devastation inflicted by the Israeli Blitzkrieg on the southern Beiruti suburb of Al Dahiye? For that matter, the Lebanese artists have a tragically vast reservoir of inspiration: Qana, Bint Jbeil, Maroun el-Ras, Marwaheen and the many other southern towns and villages ravaged by the Zionist barabarism.
Words are also a great preserver of memory, as Mahmoud Darwish’s poetry shows (“I have learned and dismantled all the words to construct a single one: Home.”), but they cannot convey, much less preserve, the sensorial, intellectual and emotional experience of visual art because words inhabit a different space in the individual and national consciousness.
Yet such an irretrievable loss cannot be allowed to pass in silence. It would take a monument of words to commemorate the loss: one made up of reverent remembrance whispers, cries of anguish, and a thunderous refusal to forget both the loss and the wound.
* Mulham Assir is a Lebanese writer based in Beirut and Madrid.
Others Articles by This Author
Syracuse University to Host International Peace Summit
Innovative Concert Capping Summit Will Further Promote Dialogue and UnderstandingSYRACUSE, N.Y., Oct. 18 /PRNewswire/ -- Many of the world's leading diplomats and human rights activists will converge at an international
summit at Syracuse University today to explore and forge practical strategies for world peace. The summit, titled "Small World/Big Divides: Building Bridges in an Age of Extremes," will discuss and examine what is working, what is not, while setting the foundation for new strategies to promote peace, dialogue and understanding in the world. Participants will include: Richard Holbrooke, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations; Dennis Ross, author and diplomat; Vartan Gregorian, President of the Carnegie Corporation; Hanan Ashrawi, Palestinian legislator and scholar; Rami Khouri, Editor-at-large of the Beirut-based Middle East regional newspaper The Daily Star; William Safire, Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist; and Diane Weathers, former editor in chief of Essence magazine.
The summit will culminate with an innovative musical concert designed to further promote peace and dialogue by bringing together artists of different religious backgrounds. Acts will include Hasidic Jewish reggae performing artist Matisyahu and Muslim beatboxer Kenny Muhammad -- also known as the "human orchestra." "This international summit is an ambitious attempt at global citizenship in Syracuse," says Nancy Cantor, Chancellor and President of Syracuse University. "Our panelists range from a former ambassador of the United Nations to a Palestinian legislator to a Pulitzer Prize winning columnist. Syracuse University is a place that fosters the important dialogues that need to take place and this summit will allow our students,
faculty, staff and community to take part and benefit from these critical conversations." The concert in the evening will echo the theme of the day -- bringing together artists of different backgrounds who share an approach that bridges traditional divides." Confirmed participants for the "Small World/Big Divides" summit include:
* Ismael Ahmed, executive director, ACCESS (Arab Community Center for
Economic & Social Services, Michigan)
* Hanan Ashrawi, Palestinian legislator and scholar, former spokesperson
of the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East Peace Process
* David Crane, former chief prosecutor of the Special Court for Sierra
Leone; distinguished visiting professor of Law at Syracuse University
* Vartan Gregorian, president of the Carnegie Corporation of New York
* Richard Holbrooke, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations
* Tazim Kassam, associate professor of religion at Syracuse University
* Rami Khouri, editor at large of the Beirut-based Middle East regional
newspaper The Daily Star; director of the Issam Fares Institute of
Public Policy and International Affairs at American University of Beirut
* Micere Githae Mugo, professor and chair of the Department of African
American Studies at Syracuse University
* Itamar Rabinovich, president of Tel Aviv University
* Dennis Ross, author and diplomat, Ziegler Distinguished Fellow at the
Washington Institute
* William Safire, Pulitzer Prize winning columnist; chairman, The Dana
Foundation
* Diane Weathers, human rights advocate, former editor-in-chief, Essence
magazine
The summit is free and open to the public and will be held in the
Goldstein Auditorium of The Hildegarde and J. Myer Schine Student Center
from 1:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Due to limited seating, tickets should be
reserved in advance by calling 1-866-933-3334 or sending an e-mail to
bridges@syr.edu.
Following the summit, Syracuse University and the University Union
Concert Board will sponsor a musical performance featuring Matisyahu, Kenny
Muhammad, the Human Orchestra; and State Radio. The concert will be held at
the historic Landmark Theatre in downtown Syracuse.
Tickets for the concert are available through
http://www.ticketmaster.com for $32 and $52. Further information about the
event is available at http://www.buildingbridges.syr.edu.
SOURCE Syracuse University