-
The top news in Israel today is the abolishment of the “Tal Law” by the Supreme Court yesterday. The law, enacted ten years ago, allowed ultra-Orthodox Jews to choose whether to be exempted from the army by studying Torah in religious academies known as Yeshivot, or be integrated into… View the full article +
The top news in Israel today is the abolishment of the “Tal Law” by the Supreme Court yesterday. The law, enacted ten years ago, allowed ultra-Orthodox Jews to choose whether to be exempted from the army by studying Torah in religious academies known as Yeshivot, or be integrated into the country’s workforce following a symbolic military service. Israeli law does not allow those who did not serve in the military to work in most public jobs.
The Supreme Court, which is normally extremely careful in overturning Knesset laws, defined the Tal Law as anti-constitutional and discriminatory. Now legislators will have to come up with a new law which will ensure a more egalitarian system.
Many Israelis, myself included, see this as a historic moment for Israel. The collective exemption of the ultra-Orthodox male population from national service, military or civilian, dates back to the early days of the state under Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion. But with their numbers growing exponentially, the current situation is untenable for Israeli society.
The Israeli political system often operates by turning a blind eye to the thorniest issues in society, enacting temporary, haphazard measures. The Supreme Court has now said “no more.” Will it ever do the same on even touchier political issues?
-
90 days after the Gulf brokered peace deal, Yemen is witnessing its presidential election which will mark ousted President Ali Abdullah Saleh formally stepping down. Inspired by fellow Arab nations, after years of living under oppressive rule, anti government demonstrations broke out in Yemen and… View the full article +
90 days after the Gulf brokered peace deal, Yemen is witnessing its presidential election which will mark ousted President Ali Abdullah Saleh formally stepping down. Inspired by fellow Arab nations, after years of living under oppressive rule, anti government demonstrations broke out in Yemen and resulted in street battles, the displacement of citizens and an intensified humanitarian crisis.
Elections
Last week the UNSC called for a “credible, non-violent and peaceful election”. Vice President Abou Rabo Mansour Hadi is the only presidential candidate approved by parliament after all nominations were rejected, such as Ahmad Al Musaibly’s - a widely supported independent journalist. Hadi, who is considered a good consensus candidate by some, is to lead the country into a transitional period before conducting competitive elections in the next couple of years.
Opposition
The Joint Meeting Parties (JMP) encompasses the Islamist Islahist Party, the Yemeni Socialist Party, the Arab Baath Party, Haq Party, the Union of Popular Forces and the Nasserite Unionist Popular Organisation. The opposition coalition was mainly responsible for the protests against the Saleh regime calling for the ousting of all officials from the General People’s Congress (GPC) and the replacement of the first past the post system with a more democratic electoral system based on proportional representation. Other opposition groups, such as the ‘Revolutionaries’, oppose the immunity law which protects Saleh and his aides. The Southern Movement is another resistance group which demands the secession of the south.
The GCC brokered deal and the immunity vote
In the aftermath of violent events since early last year, the Yemeni president (who had been in office since 1978) and opposition groups signed a peace treaty late last year brokered by the GCC. Under the deal, the president would hand over power to his deputy, the only presidential candidate, and resign within 30 days. However, the deal also guaranteed immunity from prosecution to him and his aides. The parties also agreed upon forming a government of national unity and holding early presidential elections.
Human Rights Watch has urged the US, EU and GCC to dismiss the immunity law protecting Saleh and his aides as it has no legal grounds. However, the interim cabinet, which is dominated by the pro Saleh GPC, approved it despite it being widely opposed domestically by other members of parliament and members of the opposition, and internationally by human rights associations.
According to HRW, it represents a breach of international law as Yemen is bound to ‘investigate and prosecute serious international war crimes, and crimes against humanity’. It also condemns the Yemeni Defense Forces actions throughout the political upheaval and calls for the prosecution of all human rights violations throughout the country.
If the only selected candidate has fulfilled a major role in the Saleh regime, how much credibility do these elections have? Does this mean this election is a mere change of face for the Yemeni regime rather than a change of regime itself? Is this an election to appease the international communities’ concern for Yemen? Is it a mechanism to retain the status quo without alerting the world - who with the escalating violence in Syria – has turned a blind eye to the situation in Yemen? Are we afraid to change a regime that has been agreeable in the long fight against terror? Is our fear of what may come after repressing real change? But wasn’t it that exact fear that kept dictators like Gaddafi and Mubarak in power for so long? Will unhappy protestors disrupt the elections today? I guess only time can tell…
Posted by Sarah Kilany on 21/02/12
-
A new Israeli news website was launched last week; its name: The Times of Israel. According to its founder, former Jerusalem Post editor David Horovitz, the new site will “showcase a richer, livelier mix of content than the traditional default focus on the politi, medini, bit’honi… View the full article +
A new Israeli news website was launched last week; its name: The Times of Israel. According to its founder, former Jerusalem Post editor David Horovitz, the new site will “showcase a richer, livelier mix of content than the traditional default focus on the politi, medini, bit’honi – politics, diplomacy and security.”
Horovitz hopes that the new site will become “a must-read, must-visit current affairs website.”
Elhanan Miller, Atkin Fellow for Spring 2012, is The Times of Israel’s Arab affairs reporter.
Posted by ICSR on 20/02/12
-
While diplomatic efforts continue to fail to put an end to the civil conflict in Syria, President Assad has just agreed to a national vote on Syria's new constitution. Amendments to the country’s elitist constitution were one of the original key demands of the Syrian opposition but a year… View the full article +
While diplomatic efforts continue to fail to put an end to the civil conflict in Syria, President Assad has just agreed to a national vote on Syria's new constitution. Amendments to the country’s elitist constitution were one of the original key demands of the Syrian opposition but a year into the conflict the rebels now want the ousting of the Assad regime.
What are the major changes in the newly drafted constitution?
1. The draft introduces a multi party state regime compared to a one party Baathist rule, that emphasises the importance of democracy and fair elections.
2. The presidential term will be limited to a maximum of two seven year terms as opposed to the current constitution.
3. It allows for the creation of political parties which are not based on religion, profession, or regional interests.
4. And finally it removes article 8 of the constitution which makes the Baath Party the exclusive leader of both politics and society.Following the referendum which will take place on Sunday February 26, 2012 Syria will witness parliamentary elections within a period of 90 days. The Syrian opposition has rejected Assad’s initiative labelling it as a ‘new trick in the book’.
Is this a step forward to a possible end to the civil conflict? Can a referendum be carried out properly during a civil crisis? Will the opposition change its stance on the matter?
Posted by Sarah Kilany on 16/02/12
-
In an unprecedented act of defiance, Samira Ibrahim, stood up in military court and demanded the halting of “virginity tests”. Still today, a year since the beginning of the Tahrir square demonstrations, the fate of civil liberties and women’s rights remain uncertain in… View the full article +
In an unprecedented act of defiance, Samira Ibrahim, stood up in military court and demanded the halting of “virginity tests”. Still today, a year since the beginning of the Tahrir square demonstrations, the fate of civil liberties and women’s rights remain uncertain in Egypt. The overall agenda for women’s rights groups in Egypt includes, but is not limited to, the promotion of literacy amongst women, amending the laws which discriminate against women in matters of personal status codes such as marriage, divorce, guardianship, custody and inheritance as well as promulgating laws which protect women from sexual harassment, domestic abuse, and enforcement of the country's 2008 ban on female genital mutilation.
Women’s role in the public sector, especially the political scene, has witnessed a decline in post revolutionary politics - from the three women in the cabinet during Mubarak’s era to one in the current cabinet. Furthermore, women make up only 1% of members in the lower house. The ripple effect of the absence of women will also be reflected in the new constitution as the members of the houses will elect the 100 member task force entrusted to rewrite Egypt’s constitution.
However, the April 6 movement is not giving up as it is currently responsible for organising three campaigns to educate women on their rights as voters - hoping it will lead to an increased role for women in the writing of the new constitution.
With the Muslim Brotherhood silent when it comes to questions of gender equality, what will become of the women of Egypt?
Posted by Sarah Kilany on 14/02/12
-
The split within the ranks of the Islamic Palestinian movement Hamas occupies much of the attention of Arab media these days.London-based liberal daily Al-Hayat reported on its front page on a meeting between the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei and Hamas Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyah in… View the full article +
The split within the ranks of the Islamic Palestinian movement Hamas occupies much of the attention of Arab media these days.
London-based liberal daily Al-Hayat reported on its front page on a meeting between the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei and Hamas Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyah in Tehran on Sunday. According to the report, Khamenei "warned" Haniyah against any compromise with Israel. According to Khamenei's website, the daily reports, Haniyah replied that Hamas' goal remains "liberation from the river to the sea and refusal of negotiations with Israel."
The Iranian embrace of Haniyah comes days after an agreement was reached with the head of Hamas' political bureau Khaled Mashal to accept Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas as interim prime minister, a move Iran views as preceding a dangerous rapprochement with Israel.
Al-Quds Al-Arabi claims that the split within Hamas on future relations with the PLO have reached the ranks of the Al-Qassam Brigades, the organisation's military wing. Muhammad Deif, the organisation's founder, reportedly opposes reconciliation with Fatah while his deputy, Ahmad Jaabari, endorses it. Hamas' parliamentary deputies are also divided on the question of reconciliation, with Gaza deputies opposing it and the West Bank deputies supporting it.
Posted by Elhanan Miller on 13/02/12
-
Russia quickly followed up its veto of last weekend’s UN Security Council vote on the Arab league resolution calling for President Bashar Al-Assad’s resignation with a show of support for the regime. It sent Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and the head of the Russian Foreign… View the full article +Russia quickly followed up its veto of last weekend’s UN Security Council vote on the Arab league resolution calling for President Bashar Al-Assad’s resignation with a show of support for the regime. It sent Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and the head of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service to Syria this week. Regime forces have been pounding rebel stronghold Homs for several days and have reportedly killed hundreds, however, the Russian envoys were greeted in Damascus by thousands of cheering Assad supporters.
Following the defeat of the UNSC resolution, (China also vetoed it, the 13 other members voted yes) the United States withdrew their ambassador from Damascus and the British government followed suit shortly afterwards. Turkey also announced it would expel the Syrian ambassador from Ankara. With the option of UN-approved action now closed to the Arab League and the West, efforts are underway to diplomatically isolate the Assad regime. However, it is unclear whether further intervention, such as arming the embryonic Free Syrian Army or establishing ‘humanitarian corridors’ is a constructive move.
Violence continues in Egypt after post-football game riots last week killed 74 people. Late last week thousands of protesters clashed with police outside the interior ministry in Cairo. Fans have blamed the authorities for allowing the killings to happen and some have accused police of directly inciting the riots. The military council has also drawn fire this week from the US government and international NGOs after it announced it would try 43 individuals (including 19 Americans) on charges of receiving illegal foreign funding and setting up organisations without permission from the Egyptian government. Among the groups charged are the National Democratic Institute, the International Center for Journalists, Freedom House and the International Republican Institute whose country director, Sam LaHood, is the son of current US Transportation Secretary Ray Lahood.
Hamas and the Palestinian Authority reached a deal this week to reconcile and form a unity government in preparation for elections in the West Bank and Gaza. Originally planned for later this spring (this was announced last May, alongside plans for the unity government) elections are likely to be postponed given that he two sides have only now reached an agreement. After talks in Qatar the two sides have agreed to form a government, with the full membership to be announced imminently, that will end four years of separate governments for the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reacted to the news by saying that “Hamas and peace do not go hand in hand” and that the PA must choose between a treaty with Hamas or “peace with Israel”. The Palestinian Authority also risks international aid being cut off as Hamas is designated by some Western governments, notably the US, as being a terrorist organisation and therefore prohibited from receiving monetary support.
Posted by ICSR on 09/02/12
-
Amnesty International and its partners have just launched END FGM European campaign which demands that the European Union develop a strategic plan to end Female Genital Mutilation in Europe as well as other discriminatory and violent practices against women. According to Amnesty’s website… View the full article +
Amnesty International and its partners have just launched END FGM European campaign which demands that the European Union develop a strategic plan to end Female Genital Mutilation in Europe as well as other discriminatory and violent practices against women. According to Amnesty’s website almost 8000 girls around the world undergo this violent procedure daily.
FGM is certainly not limited to Europe as it is also practiced in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) as are other discriminatory practices against women. As last Monday was Zero Tolerance to FGM day, it is appropriate that this topic is the first in a series of posts discussing issues specific to women in the Arab World.
The World Health Organization (WHO) defines FGM as “all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.”
WHO estimates that 140 million girls and women worldwide are currently living with the consequences of FGM. The practice is widespread in no less than 28 African countries. In the MENA region, it is carried out widely in Egypt and to a lesser extent in Yemen, Oman, Jordan and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. From newborns to early adulthood girls can be subjected to the procedure, with most cases occurring between the ages of 5-10. While it is sometimes performed by doctors, often it is performed by people who are not medically trained.
The instruments used range from a scalpel to a piece of broken glass, and even the lid from a tin can. Usually, the girl does not receive any anesthetic, and is often held down by other women. It is, by all accounts, an extremely painful procedure. The brutality of the procedure and the lack of hygiene severely damages the health of millions of women. The procedure has both immediate and lifetime consequences on the physical, sexual and emotional health of women. Short term complications include death from hemorrhaging, trauma, sepsis and urinary retention. Acute complications on reproductive health are one of the many severe and long term physical consequences. Other long term consequences are anemia, cysts, painful sexual intercourse, sexual dysfunction, complications during childbirth and postpartum hemorrhaging. All types of FGM also carry a risk on the fetus’ health ranging from lower birth weight, early neonatal death and still birth.
Cultural relativists argue that what may be considered morally wrong in one culture may be perfectly acceptable in another. Origins of this practice are embedded in the social fabric of societies and culture, so does this imply that international organisations are wrong for putting forward campaigns advocating the eradication of FGM? FGM is a cultural practice, and as such – cultural relativists would hold – is not morally wrong. However, what cultural relativists fail to mention is that this is a matter of human rights first and foremost. At the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights, in Vienna, women’s rights were recognised as an integral part of human rights, and also that gender based violence, including those stemming from culture must be eliminated. Since then numerous statements condemning FGM and Resolutions articulating the necessity of its eradication have emerged from international conferences, the UN and other international human rights institutions. The UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) identified FGM as against human rights. UN Article 7 from the Human Rights Committee states that “no-one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.” Moreover, the UN Committee Against Torture has not only articulated its concern over customs such as FGM, but has also urged governments to enact legislation and increase awareness campaigns. In 1993 Article 2 of the UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women (DEVAW) overtly labelled FGM as a form of violence against women. What articulates the link between this declaration and the practice of FGM is Article 4c which urges states to abstain from using traditional or religious explanations to avoid their obligations under international human rights law.Thus the argument of cultural relativism weakens, if not fails, in the face of violating the numerous human right principles highlighted. In cultures, where FGM is practiced, women and girls do not have a voice – so it remains the humane responsibility of non-FGM practicing societies to lobby, advocate and intervene to end this brutal practice. However, different justifications are still given by clerics, midwifes, mothers and fathers as to why FGM is practiced: cultural, religious, controlling women’s sexuality and social pressure. From an outsider’s perspective, the most striking point is that this discriminatory procedure is performed by women on women. Girls are tricked by their own mothers and female relatives into thinking they were going to a relative’s party or out for a walk, then they are forcibly held down by them. To better understand why women not only do not object but enforce these torturous practices one must dive into the socio-economic make up of these societies. Most of the societies where the practice is still embedded are patriarchal, where women remain subordinate to men in many spheres. To successfully eradicate FGM international law and advocacy are not enough. We must tackle the root of the problem which is the socio economic status of women. Girls are less educated than boys since they are taken out of school at an earlier age and so are financially dependent on men, which allows them to put FGM as a marital condition. The role of women is in some cases, if not most, restricted to that of accomplishing household chores and rearing children. Access to women’s health information is rare if not absent. Knowledge is power, and in this case both are absent. Advocacy campaigns recommending governments to pass laws forbidding FGM is an important step. However, the longer term solution is taking a wholesome look at the bigger picture and tackling its cause such as enforcing not only primary education but secondary and higher education too .What these women and girls need is EMPOWERMENT through education and information.
Posted by Sarah Kilany on 09/02/12
-
A year into the revolution, Egypt's political and cultural landscape is changing. Islamic politicians are growing increasingly self-confidant as the country's diminishing liberals go on the defensive.A striking example of this trend took place in the Egyptian parliament this week. Islamist MP… View the full article +
A year into the revolution, Egypt's political and cultural landscape is changing. Islamic politicians are growing increasingly self-confidant as the country's diminishing liberals go on the defensive.
A striking example of this trend took place in the Egyptian parliament this week. Islamist MP Mamdouh Ismail spontaneously began sounding the traditional call to prayer at noon in the session hall, to the protest of other MPs and house speaker Muhammad Saad Katatni. "I did not permit you to do this, there is a mosque for that," Katatni reprimanded the MP-turned-Muazzin."You are no more Islamic than us."
Is this merely the dramatic gimmick of a media-starved parliamentarian or is it an indication of a deeper, more meaningful trend in Egyptian politics?
If you ask veteran Egyptian actor Omar Sharif, he will confirm the latter. In an interview with Arab TV channel MBC, Sharif expressed his angst on the prospect that Egyptian actresses may be lashed under Egypt's new constitution, if the phrase "on condition that it [the civil law] does not contradict Islamic Sharia" is inserted into it.
MP Mamdouh Ismail did not wait for the constitution change. He added the phrase himself while taking his vow for office, provoking a media controversy.
"This elastic sentence makes me very uneasy regarding the situation and future of Egyptian art, which may resemble Iranian art overnight," said Omar Sharif. "[In Iran] an actress was lashed for revealing her hair while acting."
Another Egyptian actor who already paid the price for his art is leading comedian Adel Imam. Imam was sentenced in absentia to three months in prison and a 1000 Egyptian Pound ($165 US) fine for insulting Islamic symbols, including beards.
It seems like Imam, an icon of Egyptian cinema and theatre will not be returning to Egypt any time soon.
But perhaps all of this is actually Egypt’s version of democracy?
I smiled to myself when I saw Ismail, because he reminded me of how similar Israel’s parliamentary scene can be to that of the Arab world. Televised provocations are nothing new in Israel: just a few weeks ago MK Anastasia Mikhaeli splashed a glass of water on her parliamentary rival Ghaleb Majadleh. MKs from Kadima have an affinity for waving various objects in protest during parliamentary sessions. We never saw things like this in Egypt, but perhaps they are finally learning a lesson in parliamentary democracy from their northern neighbors?
Posted by Elhanan Miller on 08/02/12
-
A surprising article appeared today in the economic Israeli newspaper Calcalist. According to the report, Israelis are breaking the international economic isolation of Iran by importing authentic Persian carpets. According to sources in Israel’s carpet industry, the importers deceive the… View the full article +
A surprising article appeared today in the economic Israeli newspaper Calcalist. According to the report, Israelis are breaking the international economic isolation of Iran by importing authentic Persian carpets. According to sources in Israel’s carpet industry, the importers deceive the customs authorities by hiding the source of the carpets, importing them through the UK or Belgium.
Israeli law prohibits trade with enemy countries.The daily randomly called a number of local carpet shops that did not even attempt to hide the source of their quality rugs, even offering a certificate of authenticity. International furniture chain IKEA, which sells Persian rugs worldwide, does not do so in Israel.
Posted by Elhanan Miller on 07/02/12
Introduction
M!ddleEasterners is the ICSR blog. It’s a forum for debate and fresh ideas on the Middle East. It features ICSR’s Atkin Fellows – some of the most innovative, young thinkers, discussing the region.
Contributors
Posted by Elhanan Miller on 22/02/12