Tharwalizations

The New World Mayhem

The main hallmark of the emerging World Order is the utter universal lack of capable and inspiring leaders and visions. The complex task of managing a hard yet necessary transitional period in the history of humanity, a coming to terms with our global unity and interdependence and their implications, is left in the hand of mediocre leaders who have neither the prerequisite abilities nor vision nor plans to shape the current unfolding of events and developments. For this, we are bound to continue to stumble on from one seemingly manageable crisis to another and from one all too avoidable war to another until things get completely out of hand and we find ourselves immersed in a global conflict whose tragic consequences are bound to shape our collective memories for millennia to come.

Change is in the air

If the region spirals into warfare again, there will be enough blame to go around of course. But someone in the region should bear in mind that, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the region did have 15 years to reinvent itself in accordance with the new realities all around it, but failed to do so. Stability and constancy are not values always to be cherished, and change no matter how onerous a task it might pose is not an existential threat. It becomes so when people try to avoid it at all costs, just as the peoples and government of the region did. But change is coming nonetheless, and violence will play a role in it, regardless of our best intentions. We are better off planning to manage it rather than resist in that nihilistic fashion to which many of our leaders seem accustomed.

A Note on Apathy

Apathy is probably one of the most puzzling and serious social diseases affecting regional youth these days. Yet, we can blame economic conditions and the local fear culture, stemming out of authoritarian predilections of ruling regimes and the potential for ethnic strife in some cases, only so much before we have to stop and consider the involvement of other factors in this matter as well. For fear and economic hardships only represent the inhibitive side of the equation, while human behavior is equally shaped by motivating factors. Indeed, the lack of credible leaders and the lack of a promising vision of the future, both of which are necessary factors for inspiring people into action, seem to be involved here as well.

Yet, the barriers represented by fear and poverty cannot be broken unless a realistic and attractive pull factor is introduced onto the scene. Had Islamist and nationalist interpenetrations truly sufficed in this regard, our regions would have succumbed to Islamism and nationalism decades ago. But, it is the fact that many of our youths, regardless of the particular nature of their religiosity and national identity, are still yearning from something more rational and modern that is exactly what is keeping the regional options open.

But unless the more liberal and rational elements out there attempt to offer a more appealing and rational vision and soon, our youths are bound to fall by default to the lures of the only real vision now dominating the scene, which tends to combine Arab nationalism and Islamism. Moreover, the “victories” achieved by the proponents of this vision, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al-Qaeda, etc., or at least their ability to stand up to the rest of the world, and to give their followers and sympathizers a sense of empowerment, are bound to help their cause, while serving to weaken ours.

Of Freedom and Stability

We should give as much thought to the issue of quality with regard to the peace and stability that many of us are advocating and holding on to, as we do to the consequences of change and instability. After all, the search for freedom, progress prosperity and justice is no longer reconcilable, if it has ever been, with the status quo in our part of the world, and does indeed pose a serious challenge to it. Our search to improve the quality of lives requires and necessitates radical change.

We are indeed facing an existential crisis par excellence here, and have been for quite a while now, yet we continue to turn our backs on it. This is undermining our ability to survive it, both as viable states and as a viable culture. Should we persist in our rejectionist attitude vis-à-vis change, there might indeed be nothing left for us to reject soon. Our choices, our fate and our resources might just be taken away from us just as easily as they were handed down to us. History does not wait for people to make their up minds at their leisure, regardless of the legitimacy of their hesitation, their concerns and their fears with regard to change, and the all-too-human nature of them all. For history, though made by people, is as dispassionate about their feelings as time itself. History is Time. The only thing it can ever do is pass, regardless of whether we are onboard or deep under.

Reality between explanation and justification

Our attempt to explain the reality around us neither justifies nor consecrates it. Rather, it is only a necessary instrument that can enable us to better deal with it, its causes and consequences, and its impact on our lives. Consequently, our description of diversity in our region and of the rising ethnic tension in it is only meant to make sense of it and to enable us to better deal with it and with the challenges it poses for all of us.

The all too real need

Nationalism, Baathism, Islamism, whateverism, etc. Indeed, the various isms that have swept across the region in the late 90^th and early 20^th Centuries onward have been nothing but a betrayal of its amazing ethnic diversity and all the intermixing that has been taking place for centuries.

What we need is something new, a new idea of who we are, a new conception, no matter how vague, that can allow us to celebrate our differences and turn them into a source of strength rather than trouble and internecine warfare and mayhem. WE need to knit ourselves again into new fabric that can be reinserted back into the civilized world, for all our sakes.

 

Clergymen Bearing Gifts

Beware the clerics even when they come bearing victory – for the price is always too high for this worldly life.

Diversity and Turmoil

Diversity in our region creates certain dynamics that are simply too complex to be tackled through some facile generalizations. In this regard, and while Arabs across the region and the world seem to stand in solidarity with Hezbollah, the Bedouins in Israel seem to have a different opinion on this matter. Indeed, the Bedouins seem to “bitterly resent Hezbollah,” since of its Katyusha rockets tend to fall at them. Also, and contrary to how many Arabs feel with regard to the US, the Bedouins of Israel “don't think the U.S. is engaged in a war against Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and elsewhere. They think Arab anger around the world can be laid at the feet of dictators who spread misinformation to distract people from inept rule.” 

Conversely, many members of the Coptic community in Egypt seem to sympathize with Hezbollah and its cause. According to Bishop Rafic Gris, the spokesman for the Egyptian Catholic Church, “[a]ll Arabs must be proud of Hizbullah's gallantry."

On the other hand, events in Iraq have shown that while one part of the country could lie in shambles, another could be considered as an “example of success.” In this regards, the Intelligencer wonders in reference to Iraqi Kurdistan: “Did you know there is a vast region of Iraq where no U.S. troops have been killed, enemy terrorist activity has been negligible, there are few U.S. troops deployed, it is safe for Westerners to walk the streets, new business investment is taking off and there is a stable, democratic government providing more than adequately for the regions security?” 

Although, one has to note here the seriousness of the growing linguistic divide separating the Kurds form the rest of the Iraqi population.

A somewhat similar situation might be observed in Thailand. For while the southern parts of the country continue to witness an Islamic insurrection fueled in part by the deteriorating socioeconomic conditions, Muslim communities in the northern parts of the country, which have a different ethnic and national mix than their southern co-religionists, seem to be well-integrated with the rest of the population.

For their part, the Turkmen of Afghanistan are still having integration problems in the post-Taliban political system, adding another layer of complexity to the fragile situation in the country.

The problems of the Indonesian province of Aceh, on the other hand, have been further complicated when the provincial government adopted Sharia Law as the official law of the land. Indeed, this article in NY Times notes: “[a]cross this most religious of Indonesia’s provinces, brown uniformed policemen in black wagons enforce Shariah, or Islamic law. They haul unmarried couples into precincts and arrest people for drinking or gambling. Increasingly, many of the cases are pushed to the ultimate conclusion, public canings at mosques in front of pumped-up crowds.”

So, and as the region continues to struggle with the problems emanating from its diversity, its ongoing identity crisis, the aftershocks of the introduction of modernity into its folds, and fro deteriorating socioeconomic conditions and foreign dabbling, turmoil rather than wealth is the only thing that the region seems to be capable of generating at this stage. How long this will last depends heavily on the ability of the various peoples of the region to develop more pragmatic approaches to governance, development and “national priorities.” Indeed, a long-term vision for the development of the region, coupled with the necessary political will, is needed in order to prevent its continuing implosion.

Conflict Watch, July 27, 2006

Somalia

Countdown for another regional disaster is currently taking place. Both Ethiopia and the Somali Sharia militias are arming themselves and a showdown seems to be looming. Eritrea is playing its part in an attempted pay back at Ethiopia over their previous entanglements not too long ago.

Darfur

The fragile nature of the situation in Darfur continues to forebode ill for the efforts aimed at brining about a successful conclusion to the conflict. The recently peace agreement will not work on its own, some major developments need to take place on the grounds in order to bring the fighting to an end and allow relief efforts to reach the isolated communities where they are most needed.

Aceh 

Follow up is all needed to ensure the success of peace agreements. The end result is not the agreements themselves but the realities that they would create on the ground. It is amazing how many peace deals falter due to lack of follow up. Troubles in Aceh at this stage, and considering the recent environmental disasters that the provinces had suffered could easily lead to a new humanitarian crisis.

Afghanistan

The Taliban are rearing their ugly heads again. The War on Terror’s classic and consummate victory seems more in tatters than ever before, because the follow up was lacking. Not enough aid was assigned for local development and reconstruction, and this allowed time for the Taliban to continue to find good recruitment conditions in enough parts of the country to start a new campaign. They will likely fail on the long run, but not before they make a mockery out of America’s most decisive victory in the War on Terror.

Hidden Currents

The continued influx of refugees from Lebanon into Syria is adding more pressure on that country's economy already burdened by its having to cope with over 1 million Iraqi refugees. Could situation lead to an unexpected eruption of hostilities? A serious clash between Iraqi refugees and local residents has already taken place a few weeks ago in the poor suburb of Jaramana on the outskirts of Damascus. Authorities seemed to have been caught off-guard and their reaction was not as swift as one would expect from a police state. But then, Syriais becoming an increasingly fragile country, and a number of clashes between its various sectarian and ethnic groups have already taken place over the last few years. A pattern might indeed be emerging and the situation could take a nasty turn in the not so distant future.

Of Cats and Guilt

The cat-and-mouse game between regular armies and “resistance” fighters has always had a heavy toll on the civilian population and the basic infrastructure of the countries involved. It has always served to undermine the potential for democracy as well. Still, a democracy did emerge out of the rubble in Germany and Japan following WWII, and one hopes that this may still be the case for Lebanon as well, albeit all indications point to the possibility that the wrong elements might end up running things in Lebanon, once the dust settles. The elements will lord over a virtual desolation, but they will be the lords.

But then, the souls of most of our people have been talibanized long before the onset of this mayhem. Now, our cherished structures are following the lead. Desolation within translates into desolation without. External dabbling is still to be blamed, and for a lot of things, but especially, for showing us what was lurking within us all the while. Israel is denuding us. And We are all guilty. We are all to blame.

Shutting Down Guantanamo

Guantanamo is a disgrace. No one can deny that, and the recent ruling to the effect that the Bush administration had violated both American military law and the Geneva Convention in ordering the military tribunals comes as an official endorsement of point of view. Indeed, and due to the fact that such a glaring abuse of human rights is being perpetrated by the very administration that is supposed to champion the cause of democracy and human rights around the world should naturally be noted and condemned by people from around the world.

However, people from the Middle East in particular should think twice before dwelling too much on this point, the prison systems operated by their own government are far worse and date way back in time. Moreover, their silence in this regard, while understandable, is one of the main reasons why their dictatorial regimes continue to rule even after so many decades of misrule, oppression and corruption, and why American and international troops are now back in their midst.

Oppression breeds ignorance, and the admixture of the two attracts more overt foreign dabbling and intervention. The battle against abuse, even one perpetrated by far away countries, begins within. Fighting against the internal enemy should be the first priority for the reformers of the region. For once we shut down our own prisons, there will be no more Guantanamos.

Getting it Right!

Getting the right to vote is not a guarantor of anything, except a peace transfer of power. Women will not necessarily vote for women, and the best candidate in character and message do not necessarily win. Elections are above all, about organization.

Kuwaiti elections have been a mixed bag, reformist candidates won, but so did Islamists candidates, while not a single female candidate got elected, despite the fact that women were voting for the very first time in Kuwait history. All in all though, another important step on the path of democratization was just taken in Kuwait, but there is still much to learn.

Democratize but Stabilize

No one can any longer deny that there is a real and serious need for a concerted well-coordinated multilateral approach to the processes of development, modernization and democratization in the Broader Middle Eat and North Africa Region. Quick fixes are indeed impossible, but a need to shake the status quo is, nonetheless, quite urgent. If the UNDP reports of 2002-4 have served to elucidate anything, it is the necessity of drastic changes in policies in the region, but few of the existing leaders seem willing and/or capable of this. National interest considerations are not at stake here for them, it is their parochial interests, and, in typical cynical human fashion, they tend to override all other considerations.

And there is the rub: if some regimes in the region are not pushed into change, they will not willingly adopt it, and if there were pushed, they will more likely try to bunker down and challenge the world, no matter how foolish the challenge might seem. What the right course of action is in this case is anyone’s guess really. But one thing is clear, the UNDP reports paint a very dark picture of the present and foretells a future with many failed states in the region as a result of lack of the serious lack of development. And the region is just too central and too vital to be left to rot.

A few thoughts on modernity

Many if not most of the main problems facing us in the region and hindering the process of change and modernization therein are psychological in nature. One such problem is the inability of our people to reconcile themselves with the necessity of making that crossover from the traditional to the modern. Instead, most seem to believe that they can keep one leg in each world thus maximizing their benefit, that is, they think that they can avail themselves of all that advantages that modernity has to offer while holding on as hard as they can to traditional values.

Often, this dilemma boils down to a desire to get all the technology but change nothing of the customs, values and mannerisms. Some might go a little further and opt to adopt certain superficial aspects of modernity, such as the modern dress-code for both men and women, but while adhering to the selfsame value system that any run-of-mill Islamist will adhere to, such as arranged marriages and many of the usual restrictions on women, especially with regard to inheritance and chastity. 

This inability to make the break with the past and move forward that has plagued our part of the world for the last century or so is precisely why our societies are now poised at the verge of a complete relapse into pre-modern modes of existence. We have not earned what modernity has to offer, because, one, we have not taken an active part in making for centuries, and, two, because we refuse to embrace it as a whole, on account of its “glaring” imperfections.

Indeed, modernity is not perfect, what human product is? But it also cannot be perfected by people who insist on remaining outside it, or who are not wholeheartedly committed to it, or who continue to look at it with a certain disdain, it being a “foreign” product and all that, and who continue to reject its essence: the insistence on individuality and individual rights.

Indeed, if people in our region can only accept that concept of individual rights, then, each one of them becomes free to create the particular mixture of modernity and traditionalism that best suits the quirks of his/her mind and soul. For a wholehearted embracing of modernity is not synonymous with a complete rejection of everything that traditional values have to offer. On the contrary, it simply gives the individual the right to construct the values system that best suits him/her and to act on that so long as the basic human rights of others are respected. This embedded ambivalence of modernity is what makes it better than traditional value systems with their claims to divine sanctions and inability to tolerate “heretical” views.

But this ambivalence is also modernity’s weak point, one that is often exploited by Islamists, and other fundamentalists, who would protest loudly against any infringements against their basic human rights, while simultaneously and quite knowingly preaching a message that, in effect, denies others their basic human rights.

Be that as it may, every system does have weak points, and the best way to protect the modern system from its main weak point is through vigilance. The temptation to resort to intimidation and establishing legal restrictions on basic freedoms, such as free speech and the freedom of assembly is nothing less than foolish as it will eventually serve to undermine the very system we are trying to protect.

Death by Sect

Indeed, and as this article by Lee Smith illustrates, we need to focus on the real issues in our beleaguered part of the world, namely: the problems and challenges posed by our intricate ethnic and religious diversity and the enduing communal modes of belonging and organization in our midst. The potential for violence posed by our continuing neglect to seriously address these issues is rising by the day as more and more radical forces rush to fill in the vacuum left by the reticence of the moderates. The chances for peacebuilding development and enlightenment are practically non-existing in this climate and this could only spell disaster sooner than we’d like to think. 

Asking all the wrong questions

Ever since the Danish Cartoon Controversy, a spate of alarmist articles and reports on Islam and the Muslim communities in western societies appeared in various newspapers and journals across the world, all warning against the danger posed by Islam as such and all asserting that Islam as a faith is inherently violence.

But, and while I do not dispute the existence of a problem related to a clash between the values espoused by traditional faiths and those advocated by modernity, I find it too simplistic, nonetheless, to make such absurd claims. For like all other traditional faith systems out there, Islamic teachings and holy texts have throughout history lent themselves equally to the pursuit of peace and happiness as to the waging of war against the infidels and the heretics.

As such, the real questions in font of us is not whether Islam is a religion of peace or not, and not whether Europe is being Islamicized through an invasion of hordes of Muslim immigrants, rather the real questions should focus on the nature of the mechanisms that need to be employed for modernizing Muslim societies and of integration Muslims into the fabric of modern existence. The questions should also deal with the various variants of transitional arrangements that need to be involved here.

There are no easy answers here, of course, but that’s in itself a demonstration of the relevance and correctness of the questions being posed. The questions referred to above, on the other hand, can lead to the very simple conclusion regarding the inevitability and necessity of conflict, with all the compromises conflicts usually entail with regards to respect of the basic human rights of the perceived “enemies.”

Syria and the Fallacies of the China Model

Witnessing the reintroduction of the China Model into the scene of the political discouse surrounding Syria's future comes as quite an alarming developmet. The Model was first introduced into the country’s political discourse in early 2000 by some Baath and other leftwing ideologues, but now it is being reintroduced by American right- and leftwing commentators seeking to further their anti-neocon diatribe, or avert blame over the worsening situation in Iraq – after all, it is never too early to begin campaigning for the next elections on behalf of your favorite party. 

For, in essence, the Chinese Model is nothing more than a new way for avoiding dealing with the real issue at hand, namely that of ME inborn resilience and resistance to change.

As a concept, the Chinese Model puts economic change and administrative reforms first on the reform agenda in a given country, while postponing the issue of political change to an undisclosed future date. In a country like China, with its 1.2 billion people, this system still leaves us with a 2 million plus ruling elite and a corresponding complex decision-making process that opens some room for some sort of debate to take place, a debate in which quite a few capable minds are involved. As such, there is an off chance here that this Model can indeed work, for China.

but, and within the context of a country like Syria, a country already bled dry of all major brain power and most of its creative minds, the Chinese Model can oly serve to preserve the existing system of sectario-political oppression, and can only pave the way to the type of economic liberalism that can only serve the monopolistic interests of the brothers, brother-in-laws, cousins and other party members and comrades-in-arms. The society, meanwhile, has no other option but to descend into an atavistic hell.

Indeed, this is the unavoidable effect of globalization on small states with an inherently illiberal and authoritarian political culture, a corrupt ruling elite, and populations that, in the absence of good and modern educational systems, continue to be quite susceptible to the mesmerizing allure of a messianic medievalistic ideology.

But change in the region is a must. And change in Syria is now unavoidable. For the processes of its disintegration has already been set in motion, by rulers and external powers alike. To cop out on the responsibilities emanating from this now is not only cowardly, but unwise. If another sectarian mayhem is to be averted, change in the country needs to be properly facilitated and managed, and a anew social contract of sorts that can rebind the country’s various ethnic and confessional groups together needs to be introduced.

Shying away from these responsibilities will only serve to delay what has already been made inevitable, at an almost deliberate pace, and will only make the eventual implosion worse for the entire region, with ramifications that will likely be felt in many other parts of the world. Indeed, failure to intervene at the right time is often more catastrophic than mismanaging the intervention itself, albeit both are equally undesirable.

Managing our way through! – A few thoughts on the nature of our current dilemma

Interest, principle, reality and time. What do we do when all these things conflict, and begin to push and pull us in different directions? How can we manage the crises that emanate from the complex interactions of these basic facts of our daily subsistence, our historical journey, our ongoing quest to know who we are, our continuing experimentation with the fabric of life and existence, in a desperate attempt at self-actuation and self-actualization?

There are no easy answers here of course, especially within the context of Middle East politics.

Still, and on the intellectual level, the conflict under consideration and within the context of contemporary ME politics, often manifests itself as a heated debate, rife with the usual sonorous speechifying and the mutual verbal vilifications that tend to characterize existentialist, or to be more specific existentializing, if not even self-existentializing, polemics, between those who would like to think of themselves as “pragmatists,” if not “realists,” and those who may not mind at all being described as “ideologues,” although, personally, each one of them would rather reserve the term “visionary” for him/herself.

Within the context of contemporary ME politics, and ever since the tragic events of 9/11, and increasingly since the US-led invasion of Iraq, the pragmatists seem to advocate engaging unruly regimes and movements, including the Syrian and Iranian regimes and the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah, offering them a nice assortment of big juicy carrots in order to secure their compliance on certain key issues, this in the hope of avoiding a repeat of an Iraq-style scenario, one for which the final chapter should also be written soon and almost regardless of the potential fallouts on the internal situation in that country.

For indeed, the pragmatists advocate steering the course of policymaking away from any kind of open-ended involvement in the internal affairs of ME countries, where the dynamics are always too obscure and unpredictable and where the political and social situation always all too fragile.

The ideologues, on the other hand, contend that what the pragmatists have been advocating has already been tried for decades and has so far failed in generating the “right” kind of dynamism that can help incorporate the region into the more developed part of the world as docile client states, for this status represents the best that both camps, that is, the ideologues and the pragmatists, are willing to offer these states.

Be that as it may, and while the failure to draw these states into the desired relation-type cannot be solely blamed on the policies of the developed states, the policies themselves did not, nonetheless, require major review and overhaul, if not reversal. This led the ideologues to adopt a more interventionist, assertive and downright belligerent approach to the region as a whole, even vis-à-vis some of their staunchest allies, including Saudi Arabia which had produced most of the 9/11 terrorists.

The failure to incorporate the ME states (an argument that applies to the Broader Middle East and North Africa Region) into the desired system was not only due to the nature of the policies adopted by the developed states, even with regard to their policies regarding the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Nor was it related to the refusal of the existing regimes to have their states incorporated as client states per se. Nor do worsening economic conditions represent a sufficient condition in this regard.

At the core of the rejectionist tendencies we currently witness in the region, with all its manifestations, from the mere increase in social conservatism and religiosity to clear cut terrorist practices and attacks, is a psychological-cultural ethos that posits one form of messianism and Manifest Destiny against another. Islam has always been a missionary faith, and the Muslim worldview has always placed the Ummah at the cosmic center. For the Muslims to be located at the margins of things these days, for them to be on the receiving end of a condescending treatment and worldview, no matter how justifiably so in practical terms (ethical and moral considerations aside, for this whole matter, recourse to moralization by all sides notwithstanding, has always been more about power relations and politics than anything else), is something that all too simply unacceptable. 

But since a more positive and proactive approach to rejection requires a more thorough reevaluation of the basic tenets of the Islamic worldview and its traditional assumptions, not to mention a more serious confrontation with the agents of sociopolitical authoritarianism in the countries involved, opting for the more passive path of increased religiosity while showing clear sympathies with the more extremist and radical currents was the safest and easiest choice.

Meanwhile, the more “bold” and “adventurous” elements seem to have found a more appealing, as it is indeed self-deluding, alternative in asserting a more purist and ahistorical version of the faith using it as the basic drive for confronting those “usurpers” of one’s rightful place under the sun.

Looking at things from this perspective, neither the pragmatists nor the ideologues can be judged as being completely wrong. Intervention is a must – the region needs it, and the world needs it. Left to its own devices, there is enough inertia in the region to withstand all internal pressures for change, development and modernization for a very long time.

But the world is not going to wait for it to change at its own pace. The processes of globalization have long unleashed themselves upon us, and they are too blind. But the powers that be in this world are not, and although, these forces tend to generate problems (in the form of atavistic reactions, among other things) in their societies as well, they are still better positioned to manage these forces to their advantage.

As for the legitimacy of seeking to assign a client status on most countries in the ME, frankly, and moralizations aside, states can only be incorporated on the basis of their level of development. And yes, the more developed states are not going to be so wholly supportive of underdeveloped states’ drive to improve their lot in this world, if this is going to clash with their interests, somehow. For why should they step up rivals for themselves? In fact, how could they do that? Their political systems and electoral processes are bound to produce governments that are meant to seek the best possible arrangements for their electorate and lobbyists. As such, the policies that these states are bound to adopt most of the time will not be guided by a sense of enlightened self-interest, but by immediate interests of the most powerful and effective lobbies involved.

In a sense then, the entire game is rigged against “us,” the peoples of the Middle East, and it is getting more and more rigged against us all the time. So, and whether we like it or not, we need to push for breaking the current stalemate, albeit through the auspices of external powers, and albeit the immediate and even intermediate consequences are more likely to be troubling than positive. This is why the “ideologues” in the developed camp seem to be our best allies at this stage, while the ideologues in our midst are our worst enemies.

Throughout all of this, crisis management is the best skill we need to acquire.

Muslim reformers need to shout

In their first women conference in Hyderabad, India, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind president Dr. Mohammed Abdul Haq Ansari asserted that, “[i]n the name of liberty, women are being sexually exploited and misused for promotion of brands. But reality is that dogs are given better treatment than women in the western countries.”

These are some very powerful words indeed. Unfortunately, we rarely hear such powerful condemnations against women abuse practiced in Muslim societies. Our sharpest criticisms are always reserved for the West, while we tend to whitewash and deny our own problems no matter how serious they happen to be. In fact, we often tend to blame our most serious problems on the West as well.

Islamic radicalism, for instance, and according to former Iranian President, Muhammad Khatami, is the product of a “self-centred” West that is “determined to see the entire world adopt its values.”

But, and to give Mr. Khatami some credit, he does acknowledge that the “violence and extremism” we see in parts of the Islamic world seem to stem from “their backwardness and a feeling of humiliation, making understanding and compromise all the more difficult.”

Still, and unless we are ready to acknowledge that this backwardness comes as an indication that Islam itself is perfectible and that Muslims don’t have a monopoly on knowledge, even in matters pertaining to spirituality and ethical/moral behavior, and unless we are willing to tackle the specific details involved in such acknowledgements, legitimizing all the while the different approaches and interpretations that are bound to emerge as a result of this exercise, such general admissions of culpability are hardly enough to stem the rising tide of radicalism and enable our societies to rise up to the level of developmental challenges posed by modernity. 

Hiding behind the insistence on our cultural specificity by making such transparent statements and assertions as the ones made recently by Mr. Eyad Madani, Saudi Minister of Culture and Information, in the opening moments of the Jeddah Economic Forum, when he noted that "[o]ur approach isn't to call for feminism, but rather femininity," is foolish to an extreme, as everybody knows by now invoking the argument pertaining to cultural specificity is consistently used to justify the curtailing of certain basic and well-established human right. In this case, the issue was unsurprisingly that of the status of women in Saudi society.

Still, Mr. Madani did stir up a controversy when he asserted that there "is nothing in the written laws of the country that prohibits women from applying for a driver's license,” and then urged “would-be Saudi women drivers to try to overturn the ban,” often imposed by the local authorities in the Kingdom.

But such minor assertions are hardly enough to balance things up in a part of the world that insists on reliving the crusades. Unless Muslims reformers become more willing to join the intellectual battle against the extremists in their own societies, the talibanization of our part of the world will be made inevitable.