As pissed off as I get about certain things in the Middle East, this post from Emirates Economist regarding a recent article in Abu Dhabi's The National, reminds me that perceptions of politeness and rudeness are often cultural in nature and, therefore what I perceive as an act so rude as to deserve a beating, people from another culture may not even think twice about. Here's a quote from the article:
...queuing, in its many forms, is alien to the UAE, says Dr Alnajjar [Syrian origin, worked and studied in US for a long time, so has both ME and Western perspective]. This does not mean the country is rude. On the contrary, he says, the UAE, especially Emiratis and Asian workers, are scrupulously polite. But there are sharp differences between the Gulf perception of politeness and the West.“Every society has its own ideas on what is polite,” he says. “In the UK, it is polite to ask a lady on a date. Here it is not. In the UK, it is polite to say to a lady, ‘You are beautiful’. Here it is not. If you go to a man’s house and invite his daughter out, he might kill you.“In the UK, people will eat in front of you. Here, it is impolite not to offer food if you are eating.”
There are any number of examples here to illustrate the point, however, I think that some cultural phenomena are fine, while others (such as jumping queue and the other associated behaviors) are damaging economically, socially, and politically. These behaviors, at root, show a cultural propensity not to obey the rules of society, whether those be unwritten societal norms or actual laws. This is a cultural phenomenon that the Middle East and other developing regions must overcome in order to reach their full potential. If everyone (to a degree) respects the rule of law, the societies will lose some of the wasteful practices that hold back efficient production in general, and generally piss a lot of people off. Some of this is a question of public education, but it also takes enforcement. People obey speed limits when they are forced to by police or radar. People stay in queue because employees will not serve line-jumpers and (in New Jersey and other similar places) you'll get your ass kicked by a pipefitter or teamster if you try it. But in order for this enforcement to work, the individual needs to know why he was corrected for his behavior.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Oman Visa Restrictions
Economic Times of the India Times reports that the Omani Ministry of Manpower announced that it has stopped the issuance of visas for foreign laborers in a number of fields to work in Oman. These include tailoring, cleaning, import/export, electronic repair, textiles, and others. Existing visas will be renewed however.
In a questionable claim, a ministry official asserted "There is plenty of local talent but there's very little space available for them." I'd say there are plenty of Omanis available to do many of these jobs, but little existing talent in the fields. There will need to be a lengthy period of apprenticeship to transfer the existing knowledge from the expat workforce to Omanis in fields like tailoring and other skilled crafts.
The article also contained some statistics that back up some of my former assertions about the nature of the work force in Oman. According to Ministry statistics, Omanis fill 86 percent of jobs in most government sector departments. Yet in the private sector, Omanis rose from a paltry 14.7 percent in the 90s to only 16.8 percent in 2000. Undoubtedly the figure has risen in the eight years since, but the figure is still far too low for a country that is looking to create a sustainable post-oil economy.
Beyond stopping the influx of foreign laborers, Oman will have to wage a campaign to change attitudes toward these professions (especially cleaning and garbage removal), to ensure Omanis are taking advantage of the educational opportunities available to prepare them for these sectors, and to ensure that employers and current workers in the fields have an intelligent plan for apprenticeship and transfer of knowledge. Otherwise, the decision will die a quiet death of non-enforcement when employers realize that they cannot live with its provisions.
In a questionable claim, a ministry official asserted "There is plenty of local talent but there's very little space available for them." I'd say there are plenty of Omanis available to do many of these jobs, but little existing talent in the fields. There will need to be a lengthy period of apprenticeship to transfer the existing knowledge from the expat workforce to Omanis in fields like tailoring and other skilled crafts.
The article also contained some statistics that back up some of my former assertions about the nature of the work force in Oman. According to Ministry statistics, Omanis fill 86 percent of jobs in most government sector departments. Yet in the private sector, Omanis rose from a paltry 14.7 percent in the 90s to only 16.8 percent in 2000. Undoubtedly the figure has risen in the eight years since, but the figure is still far too low for a country that is looking to create a sustainable post-oil economy.
Beyond stopping the influx of foreign laborers, Oman will have to wage a campaign to change attitudes toward these professions (especially cleaning and garbage removal), to ensure Omanis are taking advantage of the educational opportunities available to prepare them for these sectors, and to ensure that employers and current workers in the fields have an intelligent plan for apprenticeship and transfer of knowledge. Otherwise, the decision will die a quiet death of non-enforcement when employers realize that they cannot live with its provisions.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Once the Jinn is out of the Bottle...
Dubai has recently cracked down on "lewd" behavior that is contrary to the city-state's morals. See the UAE Community Blog for a set of links to news articles.
But once the proverbial jinn is out of the bottle, can it be stuffed back in? Dubai wants to sell itself as a world tourism and business destination. In becoming what almost everyone describes as Las Vegas without casinos, though, Dubai has also sold its soul to a degree. It may be a bit late to correct course to try to be a "conservative" tourism and business destination.
Oman's slow, but steady and staid course may look a lot more intelligent in coming years. Financial Times reports:
One has to respect Oman and Omanis for telling it like it is, avoiding soul-selling greed, and aiming for a development model that they can live with for the long term...
But once the proverbial jinn is out of the bottle, can it be stuffed back in? Dubai wants to sell itself as a world tourism and business destination. In becoming what almost everyone describes as Las Vegas without casinos, though, Dubai has also sold its soul to a degree. It may be a bit late to correct course to try to be a "conservative" tourism and business destination.
Oman's slow, but steady and staid course may look a lot more intelligent in coming years. Financial Times reports:
Oman is developing itself as an upmarket tourist destination with a focus on culture and adventure, as distinct from the more commercial offerings of its immediate neighbours, Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. ...
Salim al-Mamari, director general of tourism promotion, says Oman has taken a "different approach" to tourism development. "We are paying attention to maintaining our identity. We are not into mass tourism. We are looking for responsible tourism, meaning those who can help me maintain Oman as it is."
One has to respect Oman and Omanis for telling it like it is, avoiding soul-selling greed, and aiming for a development model that they can live with for the long term...
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Economics, Capitalism, and Political Development
For those who are interested, one of the Economist's blogs is having a "summer book club" discussion of Milton Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom.
As reported by the Gulf News and linked by Emirates Economist, Abu Dhabi, of all places, is having serious fuel shortages these days.
Washington Post reports on Saudi Arabia's plan for a post-oil economy. Major problems are that education is still poor and Saudi manufactures are extremely few.
These are all related. How? I don't really have the time to go into great detail, but the bottom line is that Gulf states have massive economic resources in their hands due to the riches beneath their soils. These states have been able to extract these resources with relatively little effort and development. The knowledge and expertise for this industry was rented, leased, bought, contracted, however you want to look at it, from developed economies. The technical know-how, the instruments, and the educated citizens were bought, brought to Arabia, and turned to at extracting oil. This came at quite a profit to the oil companies and their employees, but also to the state governments themselves. But, critically, in this jump to prosperity, the ruling elites were never forced to build a state: educated citizenry, capable institutions, far-reaching infrastructure, heavy industrial base, and the rule of law and sense of national identity that binds all of these things together.
Like the communist economic system, this state-centric economic system is showing signs of wear and tear as the Abu Dhabi story points out. An oil rich Emirate cannot supply its own citizens with gas because there is no incentive for companies to do so at unfavorable terms. Gulf states are realizing this, and are moving toward greater degrees of privatization, are attempting to improve infrastructure, and are revamping educational curricula. Yet, some of the most important aspects of state-building, the involvement and investment of the citizens, unified under a national identity and respect for the rule of law as enforced by the government, is lacking. This will be a major challenge in the coming years. How do Gulf rulers change their societies to create post-oil economies that employ citizens in a meaningful way and provide them and their government with a powerful income source without giving up the social provisions, price supports, and other handouts upon which they have based their legitimacy? And once citizens are more educated and involved, can the ruling elites keep the tight grip on the press and other levers of power that they now have?
The Gulf over the coming years will be a real-time laboratory in state-building as they attempt to jump to economic prominence that it took other countries centuries to create. While this project is starting with the economy, there is likely to be a great deal of spill-over into the political realm, which is a main topic of Friedman's book. If the Gulf is successful in creating a post-oil economy capable of maintaining some degree of the income it enjoyed from oil, the political sphere is likely to look quite different than it does today.
As reported by the Gulf News and linked by Emirates Economist, Abu Dhabi, of all places, is having serious fuel shortages these days.
Washington Post reports on Saudi Arabia's plan for a post-oil economy. Major problems are that education is still poor and Saudi manufactures are extremely few.
These are all related. How? I don't really have the time to go into great detail, but the bottom line is that Gulf states have massive economic resources in their hands due to the riches beneath their soils. These states have been able to extract these resources with relatively little effort and development. The knowledge and expertise for this industry was rented, leased, bought, contracted, however you want to look at it, from developed economies. The technical know-how, the instruments, and the educated citizens were bought, brought to Arabia, and turned to at extracting oil. This came at quite a profit to the oil companies and their employees, but also to the state governments themselves. But, critically, in this jump to prosperity, the ruling elites were never forced to build a state: educated citizenry, capable institutions, far-reaching infrastructure, heavy industrial base, and the rule of law and sense of national identity that binds all of these things together.
Like the communist economic system, this state-centric economic system is showing signs of wear and tear as the Abu Dhabi story points out. An oil rich Emirate cannot supply its own citizens with gas because there is no incentive for companies to do so at unfavorable terms. Gulf states are realizing this, and are moving toward greater degrees of privatization, are attempting to improve infrastructure, and are revamping educational curricula. Yet, some of the most important aspects of state-building, the involvement and investment of the citizens, unified under a national identity and respect for the rule of law as enforced by the government, is lacking. This will be a major challenge in the coming years. How do Gulf rulers change their societies to create post-oil economies that employ citizens in a meaningful way and provide them and their government with a powerful income source without giving up the social provisions, price supports, and other handouts upon which they have based their legitimacy? And once citizens are more educated and involved, can the ruling elites keep the tight grip on the press and other levers of power that they now have?
The Gulf over the coming years will be a real-time laboratory in state-building as they attempt to jump to economic prominence that it took other countries centuries to create. While this project is starting with the economy, there is likely to be a great deal of spill-over into the political realm, which is a main topic of Friedman's book. If the Gulf is successful in creating a post-oil economy capable of maintaining some degree of the income it enjoyed from oil, the political sphere is likely to look quite different than it does today.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Attitudes About Work and Expats
I have gotten myself into an argument about foreign workers in the Gulf, and specifically Oman, with a commenter on the Muscat Confidential blog. See the comments for this post.
I have very little respect for some Omanis' (and other Gulf Arabs') attitude of "if you don't like it, just get out." The reason why I have this lack of respect is because, while nearly every country is dependent on foreign labor to some extent, the dependence on foreign labor in the Gulf is nearly complete. These rapidly expanding economies surely need a larger than normal portion of foreign labor due to their small populations and high growth rates. This is normal. What is not normal are cultural attitudes toward work.
My final days in Oman give a good example of what I am talking about. The moving crew that boxed, wrapped, and carried my goods out of my place were from a number of Asian nations. They were very professional, hard-working, and congenial. I was far more satisfied with the work they did than I have been with any of the experiences I had moving around America. When it came time for them to crate all my goods on trucks, the obligatory Omani driver came out with a truck. At least in Oman, unlike a number of other Gulf countries, jobs like taxi and truck driving, and some non-labor intensive service jobs are done by Omanis in an attempt to decrease reliance on foreign labor. Yet, when the driver showed up to the house (and I had similar experiences in other situations with Omani truck drivers, so this is not a unique instance) he did not partake in any of the labor. He quickly realized that it was too hot outside for him to stand idly by, watching the foreign laborers carrying heavy boxes under the sun, so he asked if he could come inside and sit on my couch while they worked. So he sat there in his immaculate white dishdasha, text messaging on his cell phone while the rest of the crew toiled away.
Every once in a while I'd go from my tidying up inside to check on the progress outside and to take the workers some juice and water. Most of the time the Omani driver was on the couch, but twice I found him correcting something he didn't like about how the foreign laborers were working in the terms and tone one would use with a child. Of course, the workers had to stand and take his abuse in the most deferential of manners.
I cannot respect people who imagine that their culture and heritage makes them so much better than others that they cannot lower themselves to hard work. In this, I do not mean to say that all Arabs or all Omanis fall into this categorization, but I mean to say that I do not respect those who imagine themselves to be too good to work like others, whether those others are expat laborers or managers. Perhaps my thinking is skewed or I have an undue cultural bias, but to me, this mindset seems to be the most breathtaking sort of arrogance, and an incredible twist of logic coming from a people whose recent ancestors eked a living out of the harshest of environments through incredibly hard work.
The driver in question told me how hard it was to make enough money to live on these days as he sat idle on the couch while a dozen foreigners worked away. Imagine this. If each Omani driver took active part in the labor of moving boxes, or assembling deliveries, or whatever else the three foreigners packed in the cab with him do, instead of sitting idle while they do the work that is beneath him, the companies could do without one of those foreigners. With one less foreigner to pay (because the driver was now doing his job), they could afford to pay that driver more. Companies would be more productive and Omani drivers would be making more.
In the U.S., the driver of a delivery or moving truck works just as hard as the others. Often he or she is more experienced and is the supervisor, but a supervisor that works in lifting, moving, assembling, etc. There is no free ride. When I've been moved within the U.S., the driver of the moving truck has often been the owner of the tractor-trailer rig, which is an asset well in excess of $100,000. These driver-owners have been among the hardest working movers I've witnessed, sweating with the day laborers in order to raise their productivity and their profit. They are not making money while sitting idle.
Someday, the drivers and other workers in Oman and around the Gulf will have to realize that their culture and heritage do not truly excuse them from hard work. In fact, they should be proud of the hard lives their ancestors led and should resolve to do some hard work themselves, in the interest of improving their own lot and that of their country. When the majority start working as hard as the expats, I will have much more respect for the attitude "like it or leave it."
I have very little respect for some Omanis' (and other Gulf Arabs') attitude of "if you don't like it, just get out." The reason why I have this lack of respect is because, while nearly every country is dependent on foreign labor to some extent, the dependence on foreign labor in the Gulf is nearly complete. These rapidly expanding economies surely need a larger than normal portion of foreign labor due to their small populations and high growth rates. This is normal. What is not normal are cultural attitudes toward work.
My final days in Oman give a good example of what I am talking about. The moving crew that boxed, wrapped, and carried my goods out of my place were from a number of Asian nations. They were very professional, hard-working, and congenial. I was far more satisfied with the work they did than I have been with any of the experiences I had moving around America. When it came time for them to crate all my goods on trucks, the obligatory Omani driver came out with a truck. At least in Oman, unlike a number of other Gulf countries, jobs like taxi and truck driving, and some non-labor intensive service jobs are done by Omanis in an attempt to decrease reliance on foreign labor. Yet, when the driver showed up to the house (and I had similar experiences in other situations with Omani truck drivers, so this is not a unique instance) he did not partake in any of the labor. He quickly realized that it was too hot outside for him to stand idly by, watching the foreign laborers carrying heavy boxes under the sun, so he asked if he could come inside and sit on my couch while they worked. So he sat there in his immaculate white dishdasha, text messaging on his cell phone while the rest of the crew toiled away.
Every once in a while I'd go from my tidying up inside to check on the progress outside and to take the workers some juice and water. Most of the time the Omani driver was on the couch, but twice I found him correcting something he didn't like about how the foreign laborers were working in the terms and tone one would use with a child. Of course, the workers had to stand and take his abuse in the most deferential of manners.
I cannot respect people who imagine that their culture and heritage makes them so much better than others that they cannot lower themselves to hard work. In this, I do not mean to say that all Arabs or all Omanis fall into this categorization, but I mean to say that I do not respect those who imagine themselves to be too good to work like others, whether those others are expat laborers or managers. Perhaps my thinking is skewed or I have an undue cultural bias, but to me, this mindset seems to be the most breathtaking sort of arrogance, and an incredible twist of logic coming from a people whose recent ancestors eked a living out of the harshest of environments through incredibly hard work.
The driver in question told me how hard it was to make enough money to live on these days as he sat idle on the couch while a dozen foreigners worked away. Imagine this. If each Omani driver took active part in the labor of moving boxes, or assembling deliveries, or whatever else the three foreigners packed in the cab with him do, instead of sitting idle while they do the work that is beneath him, the companies could do without one of those foreigners. With one less foreigner to pay (because the driver was now doing his job), they could afford to pay that driver more. Companies would be more productive and Omani drivers would be making more.
In the U.S., the driver of a delivery or moving truck works just as hard as the others. Often he or she is more experienced and is the supervisor, but a supervisor that works in lifting, moving, assembling, etc. There is no free ride. When I've been moved within the U.S., the driver of the moving truck has often been the owner of the tractor-trailer rig, which is an asset well in excess of $100,000. These driver-owners have been among the hardest working movers I've witnessed, sweating with the day laborers in order to raise their productivity and their profit. They are not making money while sitting idle.
Someday, the drivers and other workers in Oman and around the Gulf will have to realize that their culture and heritage do not truly excuse them from hard work. In fact, they should be proud of the hard lives their ancestors led and should resolve to do some hard work themselves, in the interest of improving their own lot and that of their country. When the majority start working as hard as the expats, I will have much more respect for the attitude "like it or leave it."
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Dubai Resident Visas
This story from the UAE Community Blog is a perfect example of the difficulties cities like Dubai are going to face in trying to be a world-class tourist and business destinations without having first developed rational institutions and a public educated and invested in the process of modernization. Current confusion on visa rules threatens to shut out some expats who have bought property but cannot get resident visas.
Stories like this should give pause to anyone who thinks that Dubai is on the fast track to first-class status as a business or tourism center. Once the glitter of the big buildings and opulent development wears off, one must realize that you cannot trust the government and the citizens to provide you with a safe, stable, predictable, and amenable work and living environment over the long term. Until attitudes and institutions change, these bases of first-class business and tourism centers cannot be guaranteed in Dubai. Things can still change overnight there, and speculators stand to lose their shirt if the wind shifts.
Stories like this should give pause to anyone who thinks that Dubai is on the fast track to first-class status as a business or tourism center. Once the glitter of the big buildings and opulent development wears off, one must realize that you cannot trust the government and the citizens to provide you with a safe, stable, predictable, and amenable work and living environment over the long term. Until attitudes and institutions change, these bases of first-class business and tourism centers cannot be guaranteed in Dubai. Things can still change overnight there, and speculators stand to lose their shirt if the wind shifts.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Following the Rules
A post today on The New York Times' Baghdad Bureau blog caught my attention. An Iraqi reporter, Suadad al-Salhy was invited to visit America and wrote about her observations. If her attempt at journalism had been mirrored by a similarly illogical American going to Iraq for the first time, the political correctness police would be all over the New York Times.
First, arrogance and disregard for laws by American troops is not something that Suadad made up. There are numerous reports and stories about U.S. troops breaking laws and generally acting poorly. So it is real. Yet, shooting Iraqis and putting their sons in jail is often required because those Iraqis aren't following Suadad's rules and laws themselves. I know this is simplistic, but if Iraqis would follow their own rules, laws, and religious teachings, the American soldiers would be at home following their own laws by now. And Americans seem to "do whatever they want, the same minute" but Arabs don't? That's a bit of a stretch for me.
Hmm. Maybe they are bullies and aggressive because people all around them want to kill them, but no one is wearing uniforms so they never know who the enemy is. What about the Mahdi Army? The Badr Organization? The various Sunni insurgent groups? They are not bullies and aggressive?
Again, I cannot understand this mentality. I respect her right to be veiled, but she needs to respect other people's right to get on an aircraft on which every passenger has been thoroughly security screened. I have to take my jacket, belt, and shoes off every time I go through security at U.S. airports. Why shouldn't she? Why is this an affront to her? She did not "face problems" everywhere she went, she caused them by her own behavior. I would be willing to bet that if a white woman of the same age repeatedly refused to take off her jacket, the screeners would be inclined to call the police to have her arrested for non-compliance.
Near the end, she discusses how she was again scrutinized at the UN building in New York. I have some empathy with her situation there, because she reports that other women went through without taking their jacket off, but she was subject to a more thorough search. I am sure that this would be extremely frustrating and humiliating. On the other hand, the image of Muslims in the West, as biased and over-generalizing as it may be, was not created out of thin air. When was the last time an American walked into a public building and blew him or herself up? When was the last time an Iraqi did so? So, I empathize with this woman being treated like a potential terrorist when she is not, but at the same time, until the Muslim community completely and clearly exorcizes the violent extremists from their midst, they can expect to face a level of suspicion and hostility. It is human nature.
In America everybody obeys the law, they do not consider doing anything else. They stand in line when they need to buy something. They obey road instructions, cross the street in the determined area, pay their taxes, and so on, much more than in my country.
By comparison many American soldiers in Iraq have no idea about our laws. Often it seems that they do whatever they want, the same minute. When I ask Americans about this, they say that American soldiers will submit to the rules when they go back to their country. But when they deal with Iraqi people they don’t seem to think about anything. They don’t seem to realize what will happen when they shoot Iraqis or put their sons in jail. Many American soldiers in Iraq don’t seem to stop and ask themselves the rules they needs to know to control their actions. ...
First, arrogance and disregard for laws by American troops is not something that Suadad made up. There are numerous reports and stories about U.S. troops breaking laws and generally acting poorly. So it is real. Yet, shooting Iraqis and putting their sons in jail is often required because those Iraqis aren't following Suadad's rules and laws themselves. I know this is simplistic, but if Iraqis would follow their own rules, laws, and religious teachings, the American soldiers would be at home following their own laws by now. And Americans seem to "do whatever they want, the same minute" but Arabs don't? That's a bit of a stretch for me.
I can’t understand how Americans are so nice over there, and many of their soldiers are bullies and aggressive.
Hmm. Maybe they are bullies and aggressive because people all around them want to kill them, but no one is wearing uniforms so they never know who the enemy is. What about the Mahdi Army? The Badr Organization? The various Sunni insurgent groups? They are not bullies and aggressive?
I am veiled. To get from Iraq to America I had to fly from Baghdad to Jordan to Britain to Washington. There were difficulties at Heathrow and Dulles airports. I faced problems everywhere with security. Every time they asked me to take off my jacket. I refused, and I told the rest of my group that if they insisted I would rather go back to Iraq. So the security guards would send me off to do more searches, X-rays or be searched by women.
Again, I cannot understand this mentality. I respect her right to be veiled, but she needs to respect other people's right to get on an aircraft on which every passenger has been thoroughly security screened. I have to take my jacket, belt, and shoes off every time I go through security at U.S. airports. Why shouldn't she? Why is this an affront to her? She did not "face problems" everywhere she went, she caused them by her own behavior. I would be willing to bet that if a white woman of the same age repeatedly refused to take off her jacket, the screeners would be inclined to call the police to have her arrested for non-compliance.
Near the end, she discusses how she was again scrutinized at the UN building in New York. I have some empathy with her situation there, because she reports that other women went through without taking their jacket off, but she was subject to a more thorough search. I am sure that this would be extremely frustrating and humiliating. On the other hand, the image of Muslims in the West, as biased and over-generalizing as it may be, was not created out of thin air. When was the last time an American walked into a public building and blew him or herself up? When was the last time an Iraqi did so? So, I empathize with this woman being treated like a potential terrorist when she is not, but at the same time, until the Muslim community completely and clearly exorcizes the violent extremists from their midst, they can expect to face a level of suspicion and hostility. It is human nature.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
The Saudi Minister of Labor as a Waiter
I had to repost this picture from the Saudi Jeans blog because it speaks to some of my recent posts on labor. The Saudi Minister of Labor had a photo op at a new Fuddruckers in Jeddah and extolled the virtues of working. Saudi, much more than the other Gulf states, needs to convince its people to take jobs like these because it has a much higher population to take care of than, say, Qatar or the Emirates.
According to Saudi Jeans, "The minister criticized those who look down on some jobs saying they do not understand the spirit of Quran." The minister's bio is here.
I especially liked one of the comments to the post:
Having a terrible job while you’re young is a rite of passage. My parents insisted that I work in a pharmacy or a restaurant or the like so that I would learn to treat everyone politely and not to get upset when someone was unreasonably harsh with me. With that being said, do you think the minister has ever held such a job himself? =P
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
A Crack of Light in the Press
Abu Dhabi's new daily, The National, seems to be a refreshing new idea. A paper with actual journalism. I found a recent article by Fawaz Gerges to be a refreshing read coming out of the region, even in an English paper. In it, he discusses the traditionally interpreted meanings and bases of jihad and how al-Qaeda's project to radically reinterpret these tenets has failed, producing a backlash in the Arab world against their senseless violence. Even so, his comments require some adjustment, especially for those in the West who would think he is wholly accurate about opportunities at hand.
Another comment is interesting, but I think needs a little nuance. I don't have time to look up the Gallup poll right now, but I will either post a comment or a second post with the info. I think that, while very few people think the attacks of 9/11 were completely justified, there are a lot of people who were happy to see America's nose bloodied, maybe just not in such a horrific way. I think there is a middle answer between Gerges' assertion that the attacks have very little support and the common Western notion that a vast majority supported it.
Gerges goes on to talk about the distinction between AQ and resistance to occupation. Yes, there is a distinction. Some of the resisters are fighting occupation. Americans would do the same. Just look at the movie (I know it's a movie) Red Dawn. Charlie Sheen and Patrick Swayze were insurgents and they were heroes. But there's a difference between guys like that, and the guys who are doing the same thing in Iraq, etc, and the thugs who man sectarian death squads, bomb civilians, and so on. And furthermore, people try to argue against the American definition of Hamas and Hizbollah as terrorist groups, saying that they're political parties. Well, if they were really just political parties, then why did their militias mount what were basically armed coups, albeit stopping short of toppling the government, in Gaza and Lebanon? They did not increase their power by political means, they maneuvered into political power through terror. Yes, they had some electoral successes before that, but the bottom line is that they are armed groups, seeking political power through any means available.
Here's Gerges on the subject:
Gerges, calling for the U.S. to moderate its policies to take advantages of changes in support for AQ and their like, says: "In most of the Muslim world, the US is admired for its democracy and freedoms."
I'm not so sure. I hear a lot of people throwing freedom and democracy back in the U.S.'s face. America's democracy and freedom at home is questioned, and its attempts to promote the same in the region are thoroughly discredited among many. So, I don't know that his statement is true here.
In closing, Gerges says:
I agree that ideas are important, but at the same time, I think that refutation of AQ does not equal an opening for rapprochement between the U.S. and the Muslim world. I think that the issues and wounds go much beyond AQ and support for AQ. See this Brookings Institution poll for an idea of the depth of the problem. AQ is, and always has been a marginal phenomenon. There needs to be a much deeper change in public opinions for the U.S. to have an opening. Much of this needs to come from changes in U.S. policy, but it also needs time for views in the Muslim world to change.
It is great to see this discussion in a regional paper. Unfortunately, I do not know of any plans to launch an Arabic language twin of this ambitious new project. It is sorely needed.
Al Qa'eda has lost Muslim minds because it has failed in its attempt to radically redefine jihad and gain acceptance of indiscriminate violence in the name of Islam. A number of recent opinion surveys confirm that an overwhelming majority of Muslims are not merely unsympathetic to the ideology of bin Laden and his followers - they place direct blame at his feet for the harm he has caused to the image of Islam and the damage his movement has wrought within Muslim societies.
Another comment is interesting, but I think needs a little nuance. I don't have time to look up the Gallup poll right now, but I will either post a comment or a second post with the info. I think that, while very few people think the attacks of 9/11 were completely justified, there are a lot of people who were happy to see America's nose bloodied, maybe just not in such a horrific way. I think there is a middle answer between Gerges' assertion that the attacks have very little support and the common Western notion that a vast majority supported it.
Gallup conducted tens of thousands of hourlong, face-to-face interviews with residents of more than 35 predominantly Muslim nations between 2001 and 2007, and found that only 7 per cent of respondents believed the September 11 attacks were "completely" justified. Contrary to the perception in the West that the actions of al Qa'eda enjoy wide support in the Muslim world, 90 per cent of respondents condemned the killings on religious and humanitarian grounds.
Despite the real and potent challenges to al Qa'eda and its ideology evident in these debates, they have not received the attention they deserve. The West has failed, by and large, to understand the critical distinctions in Muslim opinion on these matters, and to forge policies to address the legitimate grievances of many Muslims - foremost among them the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the war in Iraq.
Gerges goes on to talk about the distinction between AQ and resistance to occupation. Yes, there is a distinction. Some of the resisters are fighting occupation. Americans would do the same. Just look at the movie (I know it's a movie) Red Dawn. Charlie Sheen and Patrick Swayze were insurgents and they were heroes. But there's a difference between guys like that, and the guys who are doing the same thing in Iraq, etc, and the thugs who man sectarian death squads, bomb civilians, and so on. And furthermore, people try to argue against the American definition of Hamas and Hizbollah as terrorist groups, saying that they're political parties. Well, if they were really just political parties, then why did their militias mount what were basically armed coups, albeit stopping short of toppling the government, in Gaza and Lebanon? They did not increase their power by political means, they maneuvered into political power through terror. Yes, they had some electoral successes before that, but the bottom line is that they are armed groups, seeking political power through any means available.
Here's Gerges on the subject:
While al Qa'eda's "jihad" is clearly regarded by most Arabs and Muslims as terrorism, Palestinian, Lebanese, and Iraqi groups that employ violence in the service of what is seen as resistance to foreign occupation are considered legitimate. Muslims still regard the defence of besieged or occupied territories as honourable examples of jihad. It is not the violence per se that is the issue. Rather, the question is, What is the justification for taking up arms?
Gerges, calling for the U.S. to moderate its policies to take advantages of changes in support for AQ and their like, says: "In most of the Muslim world, the US is admired for its democracy and freedoms."
I'm not so sure. I hear a lot of people throwing freedom and democracy back in the U.S.'s face. America's democracy and freedom at home is questioned, and its attempts to promote the same in the region are thoroughly discredited among many. So, I don't know that his statement is true here.
In closing, Gerges says:
There is more than a glimmer of hope: the fact that al Qa'eda has been marginalised and discredited, not by military force but by exegetes using sound theological arguments is encouraging. It should make us appreciate that it is the articulation of ideas - not military force - that will defeat those who would engage in terrorism.
I agree that ideas are important, but at the same time, I think that refutation of AQ does not equal an opening for rapprochement between the U.S. and the Muslim world. I think that the issues and wounds go much beyond AQ and support for AQ. See this Brookings Institution poll for an idea of the depth of the problem. AQ is, and always has been a marginal phenomenon. There needs to be a much deeper change in public opinions for the U.S. to have an opening. Much of this needs to come from changes in U.S. policy, but it also needs time for views in the Muslim world to change.
It is great to see this discussion in a regional paper. Unfortunately, I do not know of any plans to launch an Arabic language twin of this ambitious new project. It is sorely needed.
Saturday, June 21, 2008
More Press Idiocy
I got a pointer to another glowing example of Gulf media shortly after I wrote my last post. I don't know what to call this genre. In my last post, I typed Arab press, but I really was talking about the English papers in the Arab world. English Arab press? Arab English press? The English press that is sometimes poorly translated from Arabic and at other times is terrified of biting the hand that feeds it? The doormat? What do you call it? Incidentally, for those of you who want something translated into any language, my odds are on a native speaker of the translated-into language. I can understand English mi'a bil-mi'a as it is my native language. If you ask me to translate an English article into Arabic, I can do it, but it won't be spotless. Now, with Arabic, I cannot understand it mi'a bil-mi'a, but if you give me just a dictionary in most cases, or a dictionary and an Arab in a few cases like literature or especially flowery or idiomatic wording, I can translate any Arabic piece into an English piece that will never be second guessed as to whether it was originally written in English by a native. It makes sense. Native speaker should do the writing. Even if you have an Arab translate it into English, then a native English speaker check it, or vice versa, this should be the standard for journalism. Also, many Western press sources are good at translating Arab quotes, but others translate it word for word, accidentally or purposely making the interviewed person sound like an illiterate. Not good.
In any case, after my ramble, here is the article in question: "So a drunk guy in a bar says to another drunk guy." Start of a joke? Maybe. The Gulf News reports that the recent UK terror alert for UAE was caused by two Arab drunks at a hotel bar.
I'm not sure which is more surprising: the lack of creativity in this story or the fact that they admit that there were two drunk Arabs in Abu Dhabi. Perhaps the "drunk Arabs" causing the terror alert is true, but I'd be willing to bet a year's pay that it isn't. Other stories I've read recently said that there is "no threat" of a terrorist attack in the UAE. NO threat? None? Please. Like I said in my last post, COMPLETE denial is COMPLETELY unbelievable. It only worked for Stalin because he backed it up with killing everyone.
I can't think of another adjective, so I'll say that the regional press must get beyond this CHILDISHNESS before it expects to have a real voice in changing anyone's perspective.
In any case, after my ramble, here is the article in question: "So a drunk guy in a bar says to another drunk guy." Start of a joke? Maybe. The Gulf News reports that the recent UK terror alert for UAE was caused by two Arab drunks at a hotel bar.
One drunk man told the other in jest: "If someone wants to scare all these
people and make them run away, just say there is a bomb. A belt bomb will kill
hundreds of them."
I'm not sure which is more surprising: the lack of creativity in this story or the fact that they admit that there were two drunk Arabs in Abu Dhabi. Perhaps the "drunk Arabs" causing the terror alert is true, but I'd be willing to bet a year's pay that it isn't. Other stories I've read recently said that there is "no threat" of a terrorist attack in the UAE. NO threat? None? Please. Like I said in my last post, COMPLETE denial is COMPLETELY unbelievable. It only worked for Stalin because he backed it up with killing everyone.
I can't think of another adjective, so I'll say that the regional press must get beyond this CHILDISHNESS before it expects to have a real voice in changing anyone's perspective.
Human Trafficking in the Press
A good bit of debate has been going around Oman's blogging community (here and here) regarding the recent U.S. State Department Human Trafficking Report, which labeled Oman as Tier 3 (the worst of 3 tiers) for the second year running. The validity of this rating, or lack thereof, has been batted back and forth as can be seen at the two posts linked above. What I want to address here is the reaction by public officials and the press, which was actually the original issue in Undercover Dragon's post.
If Oman (press, politicians, people) wants to criticize the legitimacy of the rating, fine. If they want to question the U.S.'s right to level such a charge, whether in terms of national sovereignty or in terms of moral standing, fine. But the sad thing is that the Omani press and public officials could have gained credibility by saying, "Yes, there are SOME problems in Oman, but they are very slight in comparison to other Tier 3 countries and we are working very hard to fix them. Therefore, we feel that the U.S. report is innacurate and misleading." Take that theme and run with it. You can even play on a variation, and admit that there is a slight problem, but that the U.S. was purposely misleading to attain political goal X. I assure you, though, that high-level political operators have much more important machinations to occupy themselves with than this report that made little impact anywhere but Oman.
Instead, the latest gem from the Omani press in the Times of Oman, goes to quote an American, an Indian, a Dutch, and a Fillipino, all of whom deny the validity of the report out of hand. Several go on about how Oman is a free, fair, and tolerant place. Who cares? Is the report about freedom and tolerance or about the few people who traffick humans and the fact that Oman has not made sufficient attempts to stop them? So, the writer needs to tailor her questions and steer her interviewees more to the point.
Then there is this whopper:
Really? I've been here a bit less than 10 years, but I know that "Josie" is either lying, or she spends all day at the Left Bank or some other high end place sozzling and never gets beyond some high-end expat circles. Alternatively, perhaps she is one of those expats who has some sort of Stockholm syndrome where they want to be more Omani than the Omanis (or whatever other country they happen to be in). For those who have followed the debates at MuscatConfidential and Blue-Chi, Balqis falls into this category.
To someone who already believes that Oman is squeaky clean, of course this is very soothing, but to the many who believe that there is a problem and think that Oman deserved Tier 3, this does nothing to change their minds. Now, if you told me "yes, there is a problem" then went on to explain why it is not as bad as the U.S. says and then gave me examples of how Oman is fighting it and how the U.S. report is overstated, I'd have to moderate my position. But if you say, "There is no problem whatsoever," I know you are lying.
Now, for those who question the U.S.'s right to do this, I have a few comments. First, the U.S. needs to realize that many of its policies, especially with regard to the War on Terror, impeach its credibility in cases like this. I recognize that. But, why does the U.S. make reports like this? Part of the reason is because people in the U.S. truly feel that the country is an "exceptional" beacon of freedom and want to spread that freedom. Question the politicians and policies all you want, but I am telling you that Americans truly want to spread freedom. The other part is because activists and victims from all over the world lobby the U.S., as the world's greatest power, to use that power to good. The U.S. didn't come with these reports to humiliate people. Someone who either was a victim of human trafficking, or saw it first-hand started spreading the word, then some activist group got involved and pressured Congress members, etc. until a law was passed requiring this report, in the hopes that it would force nations to take steps to stop these practices. So, you have to understand this wasn't some report Bush dreamed up to humiliate Oman.
Finally, here are a few links to reports or articles from the U.S. about human trafficking in our own country. While we don't give ourselves a rating, we do criticize and evaluate and try to improve. Americans never trust answers like the Times of Oman gives, so American journalists try to give both sides of the story, those who say there is no problem, and those who say there is. Then, with the weight of quotes and facts, the reader is left to decide what the truth is. If the reader is given only one side, he or she is left to think that the writer is covering something up.
Look at the below links from the U.S. government and press about trafficking in the U.S. The U.S. has a big problem with human trafficking too. Probably a lot bigger than Oman's in some ways. Yet, the U.S. admits the problem and has stern measures in place to deal with it, and actively investigates and prosecutes it.
After reading the below links, consider whether the Arab press will ever get beyond catering to those who are already convinced by striking a middle tone that may win the unconvinced over to their side. As it is, they are verbally mastrubating each other in a closed circle. Evidently they don't want anyone else to join in.
U.S. Department of Education factsheet that states that human trafficking has been reported in all 50 U.S. states and Washington DC.
A newspaper article about Louisiana kids being sold for sex. (Americans trafficking Americans)
Newspaper article about a (Hispanic) American couple who lured Hispanics from Latin America with promises of good pay then forcing them into work.
Department of Health and Human Services factsheet that states that around 15,000 persons are trafficked across U.S. borders annually.
If Oman (press, politicians, people) wants to criticize the legitimacy of the rating, fine. If they want to question the U.S.'s right to level such a charge, whether in terms of national sovereignty or in terms of moral standing, fine. But the sad thing is that the Omani press and public officials could have gained credibility by saying, "Yes, there are SOME problems in Oman, but they are very slight in comparison to other Tier 3 countries and we are working very hard to fix them. Therefore, we feel that the U.S. report is innacurate and misleading." Take that theme and run with it. You can even play on a variation, and admit that there is a slight problem, but that the U.S. was purposely misleading to attain political goal X. I assure you, though, that high-level political operators have much more important machinations to occupy themselves with than this report that made little impact anywhere but Oman.
Instead, the latest gem from the Omani press in the Times of Oman, goes to quote an American, an Indian, a Dutch, and a Fillipino, all of whom deny the validity of the report out of hand. Several go on about how Oman is a free, fair, and tolerant place. Who cares? Is the report about freedom and tolerance or about the few people who traffick humans and the fact that Oman has not made sufficient attempts to stop them? So, the writer needs to tailor her questions and steer her interviewees more to the point.
Then there is this whopper:
“Human trafficking? There is nothing like that over here. The report is
extremely biased and unjustified, to say the least,” says Josie, a Dutch
national who has been living in Muscat for the last 10 years. “The rules are
very strict here and no one is allowed to come and go without proper
documentation. That being the case, I can confidently say there is absolutely no
trafficking of any sort happening here.”
Really? I've been here a bit less than 10 years, but I know that "Josie" is either lying, or she spends all day at the Left Bank or some other high end place sozzling and never gets beyond some high-end expat circles. Alternatively, perhaps she is one of those expats who has some sort of Stockholm syndrome where they want to be more Omani than the Omanis (or whatever other country they happen to be in). For those who have followed the debates at MuscatConfidential and Blue-Chi, Balqis falls into this category.
To someone who already believes that Oman is squeaky clean, of course this is very soothing, but to the many who believe that there is a problem and think that Oman deserved Tier 3, this does nothing to change their minds. Now, if you told me "yes, there is a problem" then went on to explain why it is not as bad as the U.S. says and then gave me examples of how Oman is fighting it and how the U.S. report is overstated, I'd have to moderate my position. But if you say, "There is no problem whatsoever," I know you are lying.
Now, for those who question the U.S.'s right to do this, I have a few comments. First, the U.S. needs to realize that many of its policies, especially with regard to the War on Terror, impeach its credibility in cases like this. I recognize that. But, why does the U.S. make reports like this? Part of the reason is because people in the U.S. truly feel that the country is an "exceptional" beacon of freedom and want to spread that freedom. Question the politicians and policies all you want, but I am telling you that Americans truly want to spread freedom. The other part is because activists and victims from all over the world lobby the U.S., as the world's greatest power, to use that power to good. The U.S. didn't come with these reports to humiliate people. Someone who either was a victim of human trafficking, or saw it first-hand started spreading the word, then some activist group got involved and pressured Congress members, etc. until a law was passed requiring this report, in the hopes that it would force nations to take steps to stop these practices. So, you have to understand this wasn't some report Bush dreamed up to humiliate Oman.
Finally, here are a few links to reports or articles from the U.S. about human trafficking in our own country. While we don't give ourselves a rating, we do criticize and evaluate and try to improve. Americans never trust answers like the Times of Oman gives, so American journalists try to give both sides of the story, those who say there is no problem, and those who say there is. Then, with the weight of quotes and facts, the reader is left to decide what the truth is. If the reader is given only one side, he or she is left to think that the writer is covering something up.
Look at the below links from the U.S. government and press about trafficking in the U.S. The U.S. has a big problem with human trafficking too. Probably a lot bigger than Oman's in some ways. Yet, the U.S. admits the problem and has stern measures in place to deal with it, and actively investigates and prosecutes it.
After reading the below links, consider whether the Arab press will ever get beyond catering to those who are already convinced by striking a middle tone that may win the unconvinced over to their side. As it is, they are verbally mastrubating each other in a closed circle. Evidently they don't want anyone else to join in.
U.S. Department of Education factsheet that states that human trafficking has been reported in all 50 U.S. states and Washington DC.
A newspaper article about Louisiana kids being sold for sex. (Americans trafficking Americans)
Newspaper article about a (Hispanic) American couple who lured Hispanics from Latin America with promises of good pay then forcing them into work.
Department of Health and Human Services factsheet that states that around 15,000 persons are trafficked across U.S. borders annually.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Bias, Asabiyah, and Oman's Three Monkeys
The recent Human Trafficking Report labeling Oman as an unchanged Tier-3 country has caused some back-and-forth on Oman's blogs. There are links to the right under "Interesting Posts." Interestingly, an unrelated blogger, EmiratesEconomist recently posted a quote from the Overcoming Bias blog (which I can't get to open for some reason): "being more aware of biases makes us more willing to assume that others' biases, and not ours, are responsible for our disagreement."
So, while highly educated people should be more aware of biases, they could just as easily turn that knowledge about biases around to assume that the other person's bias is the root of disagreement. I think this works both ways in the recent debate. And how would Ibn Khaldun's concept of "asabiyah" or in-group solidarity play into this quote about biases?
So, while highly educated people should be more aware of biases, they could just as easily turn that knowledge about biases around to assume that the other person's bias is the root of disagreement. I think this works both ways in the recent debate. And how would Ibn Khaldun's concept of "asabiyah" or in-group solidarity play into this quote about biases?
Monday, June 16, 2008
Roman History
"Before the destruction of Carthage, the people and the Senate of Rome together governed the Republic peacefully and with moderation. But when the minds of the people were relieved of that dread, wantonness and arrogance naturally arose, vices which are fostered by prosperity."
Gaius Sallustus Crispus - 1st century BC
Quoted after David Levering Lewis, God's Crucible: Islam and the Making of Europe, 570-1215 (He quoted it after another, obscure book).
Gaius Sallustus Crispus - 1st century BC
Quoted after David Levering Lewis, God's Crucible: Islam and the Making of Europe, 570-1215 (He quoted it after another, obscure book).
Friday, June 13, 2008
Militias: A Problem Beyond Iraq and Lebanon
Militias are a major problem in Iraq and Lebanon, where the state is too weak to police many areas. Therefore, militias become the "guardians" of neighborhoods, providing everything from security to social services. These services come at a price, as the militias often take their cut in the way of protection payments and organized crime. In Iraq, forces like the Mahdi Army and Sunni insurgent groups, beyond their attacks on U.S. troops and other groups in Iraq, provided local militia "services." With the rise of the Awakening groups, local forces recruited to provide security across Iraq, it would seem that the scourge of the militias should be over. Yet, in a similar story in Brazil, local militias that organized to chase out drug gangs have become as much of a scourge as the drug gangs, even torturing a group of undercover investigative reporters.
The phenomenon goes beyond Brazil. I'm sure I could find a host of other developing countries where militias offer protection in turn for payments and criminal enterprises, but one need only look to the U.S. to find that many street gangs organize themselves as neighborhood protectors. The excellent book "Islands in the Street" by Martin Jankowski, a sociologist who lived with gangs as his field research, details how many gangs are organized as local defense forces in areas where policing is light or non-existent. These gangs are tied into social organizations of the older generation, many of whom were gang members when younger. Beyond keeping other criminals off their turf, many gangs help around the neighborhood and even do what could be considered as social services, dispute negotiation, etc. Jankowski's findings stemmed from observation of a cross-section of gangs, including Latino, Puerto Rican, African-American, and Irish gangs on the East and West Coast.
Wush az-zubda? What is the point? Local defense militias are increasingly common across the world in areas where policing is light. Even when citizens organize to keep the likes of drug dealers or insurgents out of their area, the potential for criminal abuses is high. Perhaps increased interest in community policing by security officials and analysts is in order.
The phenomenon goes beyond Brazil. I'm sure I could find a host of other developing countries where militias offer protection in turn for payments and criminal enterprises, but one need only look to the U.S. to find that many street gangs organize themselves as neighborhood protectors. The excellent book "Islands in the Street" by Martin Jankowski, a sociologist who lived with gangs as his field research, details how many gangs are organized as local defense forces in areas where policing is light or non-existent. These gangs are tied into social organizations of the older generation, many of whom were gang members when younger. Beyond keeping other criminals off their turf, many gangs help around the neighborhood and even do what could be considered as social services, dispute negotiation, etc. Jankowski's findings stemmed from observation of a cross-section of gangs, including Latino, Puerto Rican, African-American, and Irish gangs on the East and West Coast.
Wush az-zubda? What is the point? Local defense militias are increasingly common across the world in areas where policing is light. Even when citizens organize to keep the likes of drug dealers or insurgents out of their area, the potential for criminal abuses is high. Perhaps increased interest in community policing by security officials and analysts is in order.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Oman in a Recent Study of Public Good Attitudes
Emirates Economist posted commentary and quotes regarding a Wall Street Journal article about cooperation and free-loading in a public good simulation game. Economists and sociologists set up experiments like this to test how people cooperate or defect in situations regarding public goods. I.E. do people contribute to the public good in these scenarios or free-load?
In the study, researchers found that basic responses were fairly similar across 16 countries surveyed, but differences appeared when subjects were allowed to punish free-loaders.
In cases where policymakers are seeking cooperation, such as improving road safety, protecting the environment, etc., do such attitudes cripple their efforts? And what about the guy who drives like a psycho, but gets even more psycho when people confront him?
In the study, researchers found that basic responses were fairly similar across 16 countries surveyed, but differences appeared when subjects were allowed to punish free-loaders.
Among students in the U.S., Switzerland, China and the U.K., those identified as freeloaders most often took their punishment as a spur to contribute more generously. But in Oman, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Greece and Russia, the freeloaders more often struck back, retaliating against those who punished them, even against those who had given most to everyone's benefit. It was akin to rapping the knuckles of the helping hand.
In cases where policymakers are seeking cooperation, such as improving road safety, protecting the environment, etc., do such attitudes cripple their efforts? And what about the guy who drives like a psycho, but gets even more psycho when people confront him?
MEMRI Fodder
In a recent post, Abbas Hawazin, an Iraqi living in Amman commented on the material available at MEMRI.
I in no way think, like some, that this is representative of all Arabs and I appreciate Abbas posting the innocent side of things that come out of the Arab world. Yet, the MEMRI fodder is what I was talking about in a recent debate below. The Arab media provides an outlet for the lowest of the low and this does immeasurable damage to the Arab image in the world and significantly weakens public sympathy for Arab desires and policies in the West. This directly impacts Arab states' ability to achieve their foreign policy goals.
You won't see this on MEMRI, Amidst all the gay-bashing, hypocritical, sex-obsessed, honor-killing, helplessly fanatic, anti-semitic, horribly depressing 7th century Middle East where children shows diligently instruct children to decimate people of the Jewish religion, and unfortuantely for Mister Ghost and his ilk, people do act like normal funloving human beings sometimes. [GASP!] This innocent, nonsensical Egyptian song a la Lewis Carrol had a major effect on the weirder parts of my feeble young boy's brain. I realized today that it means absolutely nothing, and its rhythms are probably the worst ever made, that's why it's so fun...
I in no way think, like some, that this is representative of all Arabs and I appreciate Abbas posting the innocent side of things that come out of the Arab world. Yet, the MEMRI fodder is what I was talking about in a recent debate below. The Arab media provides an outlet for the lowest of the low and this does immeasurable damage to the Arab image in the world and significantly weakens public sympathy for Arab desires and policies in the West. This directly impacts Arab states' ability to achieve their foreign policy goals.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
NYT Story Too Bizarre to Pass Up
The New York Times ran a story today about the growing number of Muslim women in Europe that are having hymenoplasty, a cosmetic surgery procedure to restore the illusion of virginity. Unfortunately, the web article does not show what page it was printed on, but it was prominent enough to make their daily email newsletter.
A woman interviewed for the story attributed the rupture of her membrane to a horse riding accident. She decided to have the hymenoplasty procedure when she was unable to obtain a certificate of virginity for her upcoming wedding, after hearing about a recent French court case in which a divorce was granted because the bride was not a virgin as was promised. This has reportedly pushed many Muslim women to have the procedure.
In one passage, an Italian director of a film that makes light of the subject comments about how these women can integrate into European society well, but cannot resist their culture on this matter. In one case in the article, a couple decided to share the costs of the surgery in order to placate conservative parents. I can only hope that people who had to go to these lengths will be a liberalizing influence for their children and for people around them in the future.
Second, for the cases that are not cooperation between partners, I can't help but wonder what such deception does to a marriage psychologically. Of course, there is plenty of deception going into many marriages around the world, but this deception usually doesn't come with certificated physical evidence to back it up.
Finally, while Westerners might want to smugly look down at this practice, we should take a look at one sentence of the article and take a second to think:
Similar ideas about virginity and marriage are not that far gone from the West. While many in the West encourage chastity until marriage, the issue is no longer the subject of certificates or other proof. My understanding is that many cultures had similar practices (such as the showing of the sheet) until recently. I don't have time to research it, so if someone has knowledge of such practices in Europe, please comment. In any case, norms and values that are seen as archaic to many in the West were common in their own families only a generation or two back.
I'll give the last word to the vice president of the Islamic Center in Lille, France where the wedding was held for couple whose marriage was annulled over her non-virgin status:
“The man is the biggest of all the donkeys. Even if the woman was no longer a virgin, he had no right to expose her honor. This is not what Islam teaches. It teaches forgiveness.”
A woman interviewed for the story attributed the rupture of her membrane to a horse riding accident. She decided to have the hymenoplasty procedure when she was unable to obtain a certificate of virginity for her upcoming wedding, after hearing about a recent French court case in which a divorce was granted because the bride was not a virgin as was promised. This has reportedly pushed many Muslim women to have the procedure.
In one passage, an Italian director of a film that makes light of the subject comments about how these women can integrate into European society well, but cannot resist their culture on this matter. In one case in the article, a couple decided to share the costs of the surgery in order to placate conservative parents. I can only hope that people who had to go to these lengths will be a liberalizing influence for their children and for people around them in the future.
Second, for the cases that are not cooperation between partners, I can't help but wonder what such deception does to a marriage psychologically. Of course, there is plenty of deception going into many marriages around the world, but this deception usually doesn't come with certificated physical evidence to back it up.
Finally, while Westerners might want to smugly look down at this practice, we should take a look at one sentence of the article and take a second to think:
"The issue has been particularly charged in France, where a renewed and fierce debate has occurred about a prejudice that was supposed to have been buried with the country’s sexual revolution 40 years ago: the importance of a woman’s virginity."
Similar ideas about virginity and marriage are not that far gone from the West. While many in the West encourage chastity until marriage, the issue is no longer the subject of certificates or other proof. My understanding is that many cultures had similar practices (such as the showing of the sheet) until recently. I don't have time to research it, so if someone has knowledge of such practices in Europe, please comment. In any case, norms and values that are seen as archaic to many in the West were common in their own families only a generation or two back.
I'll give the last word to the vice president of the Islamic Center in Lille, France where the wedding was held for couple whose marriage was annulled over her non-virgin status:
“The man is the biggest of all the donkeys. Even if the woman was no longer a virgin, he had no right to expose her honor. This is not what Islam teaches. It teaches forgiveness.”
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Youth Bulge and Unemployment
The Financial Times published a report about the youth bulge and unemployment in the Arab world. One part was particularly troubling to me:
I cannot understand, when unemployment rates are well over 10 percent, why construction and other sectors are unacceptable. I look at the poor construction workers and understand why no one would really want to do it especially in this heat, but the South Asians are breaking their backs to make a better live for someone, whether themselves or families back home. But when I go to restaurants, stores, etc. and see that expats are brought in even to man the window at the McDonald's drive through, I cannot understand the logic. This is a taboo that must be broken (and it is, little by little in some areas) if the Gulf is ever to prepare itself for life after oil and gas.
There is a place for Gulf tradesmen in the construction industry. Gulf waiters at classy restaurants. Gulf managers at fast food places. This will not only help to ease the youth unemployment problems, but will also prepare young workers for better jobs down the road. I'm not a laborer now, but I worked as a laborer during college, as well as in the service industry. I learned just how hard "hard work" can be, and I also learned what it is like to be treated poorly by arrogant customers. Both lessons served me well and the overall experiences prepared me to do well when I started a career later.
Will there be a day when the glistening new industrial cities being put together in Saudi by S. Asian labor will be manned by Saudi factory workers? There must be if the state is to survive the end of oil.
I'll close with a quote from one of Bahrain's ministers (I can't remember if it was Min. of Labor or another portfolio). He was quoted in Sharq al-Awsat and some of the local Bahraini press a few months ago (as I remember it):
"A lord in England washes his own car on Saturday, but Gulf Arab calls for a foreign worker to bring him a glass of water sitting ten feet away."
How can this taboo be broken? Or must another solution be found for employment? Please comment.
The higher rates of annual growth – more than 5 per cent region-wide but nearly double digits in some Gulf states – have started to generate jobs, with regional unemployment estimated to have dropped to about 12.7 per cent. Yet anxiety over youth unemployment remains the most nagging concern as experts find that new jobs are going to foreign workers in the thriving construction industry or tend to be in the informal sector, leading to seasonal rather than sustainable employment.
“There is a boom in the region and youth unemployment is benefiting but the kinds of jobs created, especially in non-Gulf countries, are not necessarily the kind of jobs we need,” says Tarik Yousef, dean of the Dubai School of Government and an expert on youth employment. “They are low-paying jobs, without long-term contract, without social mobility, for people in the non-formal private sector, and in sectors not high on technology.” This job creation, he says, does not fit into the aspirations of typical youth in the region, whose idea of economic security is a well-paid overnment job with tenure and social mobility.
I cannot understand, when unemployment rates are well over 10 percent, why construction and other sectors are unacceptable. I look at the poor construction workers and understand why no one would really want to do it especially in this heat, but the South Asians are breaking their backs to make a better live for someone, whether themselves or families back home. But when I go to restaurants, stores, etc. and see that expats are brought in even to man the window at the McDonald's drive through, I cannot understand the logic. This is a taboo that must be broken (and it is, little by little in some areas) if the Gulf is ever to prepare itself for life after oil and gas.
There is a place for Gulf tradesmen in the construction industry. Gulf waiters at classy restaurants. Gulf managers at fast food places. This will not only help to ease the youth unemployment problems, but will also prepare young workers for better jobs down the road. I'm not a laborer now, but I worked as a laborer during college, as well as in the service industry. I learned just how hard "hard work" can be, and I also learned what it is like to be treated poorly by arrogant customers. Both lessons served me well and the overall experiences prepared me to do well when I started a career later.
Will there be a day when the glistening new industrial cities being put together in Saudi by S. Asian labor will be manned by Saudi factory workers? There must be if the state is to survive the end of oil.
I'll close with a quote from one of Bahrain's ministers (I can't remember if it was Min. of Labor or another portfolio). He was quoted in Sharq al-Awsat and some of the local Bahraini press a few months ago (as I remember it):
"A lord in England washes his own car on Saturday, but Gulf Arab calls for a foreign worker to bring him a glass of water sitting ten feet away."
How can this taboo be broken? Or must another solution be found for employment? Please comment.
SUV Parking Update
I returned to City Center recently. It seems that the small white car drivers of Oman, driven mad with jealousy over the special treatment afforded to SUV drivers by mall authorities, have conspired to block the SUV parking spot (and half of the aisle) with their Carrefour trollies.
Oman's Ministry of Sports
I noticed this sign recently at Markaz al-Bahja, a local shopping mall. There is a similar version in Arabic on the other side of the rotunda. The sign announces a summer sports program run by Oman's Ministry of Sports. I've read a number of analyses about places like Saudi Arabia, where young men are extremely frustrated because they have nothing to do and no outlets like sports. Youth often turn to other activities, such as chasing girls around in cars trying to flash their mobile number or "drifting" in which they skid and slide around the roads in small, tuned import cars.Oman is quite different. Single, young men can go to malls with no problem (Saudi single young males are often prohibited from entering the mall), there are movie theaters, and a host of other activities. Still, I found the offering of sports programs as an incentive to "stay off the roads" (according to the sign) to be an excellent initiative.
Can the Recent Increases in Food Prices Actually be a Good Thing?
The Financial Times recently reported about Abu Dhabi's plan to invest in agriculture in the developing world. There are other stories out there of a similar nature. So, could the rise in food prices actually be a good thing?
The food system seems to be broken. American policies with regard to using corn to produce ethanol most likely have a distorting effect, but there are more general problems. Populations continue to grow, but critically they are also growing wealthier. In some developing countries, people are eating significant quantities of meat for the first time. Because meat takes a significant amount of grain to grow and grain is already expensive, the price effect is magnified in meat products. The increasing consumption of meat also puts additional pressures on grain supplies.
Moreover, inefficient farming practices hurt productivity that could help the market to bear increasing demands and help to staunch rising prices to a degree. There are other inflationary pressures and transport costs are a factor as well, but there's no denying that the world could benefit from improved farming practices, both from a monetary aspect and an environmental aspect. For instance, poor irrigation methods waste water.
Take Morocco as an example. It has the same percentage of arable land as the United States and grows significant quantities of wheat and other products, but farms are often small holdings and archaic techniques are used. These techniques cannot be improved without modern equipment and infrastructure. So, the rise in food prices is encouraging investment in the sector. This investment may help to improve farming efficiency, thereby helping to improve harvests and reduce waste. The investment may force a move to larger, more industrial farms. This will undoubtedly cause some dislocation, as it has elsewhere in the world, but ultimately it may help to improve the country's economy overall and allow some people to move to more productive sectors if economic policies are integrated intelligently.
The food system seems to be broken. American policies with regard to using corn to produce ethanol most likely have a distorting effect, but there are more general problems. Populations continue to grow, but critically they are also growing wealthier. In some developing countries, people are eating significant quantities of meat for the first time. Because meat takes a significant amount of grain to grow and grain is already expensive, the price effect is magnified in meat products. The increasing consumption of meat also puts additional pressures on grain supplies.
Moreover, inefficient farming practices hurt productivity that could help the market to bear increasing demands and help to staunch rising prices to a degree. There are other inflationary pressures and transport costs are a factor as well, but there's no denying that the world could benefit from improved farming practices, both from a monetary aspect and an environmental aspect. For instance, poor irrigation methods waste water.
Take Morocco as an example. It has the same percentage of arable land as the United States and grows significant quantities of wheat and other products, but farms are often small holdings and archaic techniques are used. These techniques cannot be improved without modern equipment and infrastructure. So, the rise in food prices is encouraging investment in the sector. This investment may help to improve farming efficiency, thereby helping to improve harvests and reduce waste. The investment may force a move to larger, more industrial farms. This will undoubtedly cause some dislocation, as it has elsewhere in the world, but ultimately it may help to improve the country's economy overall and allow some people to move to more productive sectors if economic policies are integrated intelligently.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Tagged by Dragon
I've been tagged by Undercover Dragon to post three sentences starting with sentence 5 of page 123 of the nearest book.
Here are my three sentences:
"It is laziness, our language is very lazy; we do not search for the names of things, we name them haphazardly and it is up to the listener to understand. The other has to know what you want to say in order to comprehend you; otherwise we are misunderstood.
This is the word I was searching for."
From "Bab al-Shams" by Elias Khoury. The speaker is talking about the Arabic language (the translation from the original Arabic is mine, but there's an English translation available from Humphrey Davies).
Here are my three sentences:
"It is laziness, our language is very lazy; we do not search for the names of things, we name them haphazardly and it is up to the listener to understand. The other has to know what you want to say in order to comprehend you; otherwise we are misunderstood.
This is the word I was searching for."
From "Bab al-Shams" by Elias Khoury. The speaker is talking about the Arabic language (the translation from the original Arabic is mine, but there's an English translation available from Humphrey Davies).
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Deep Thoughts by Shantaram
"When we act, even with the best of intentions, when we interfere with the world, we always risk a new disaster that mightn't be of our making, but that wouldn't occur without our action."
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Suicide Bombing in Pakistan
The Danish Embassy was attacked yesterday by a suicide bomber, killing eight and wounding twenty-four according to initial reports. There has not been a statement of responsiblity yet, but it is a relatively safe bet that the Embassy was targeted due to the decision by Danish newspapers to reprint offensive cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH).
The sad thing, beyond the loss of life, is the logic that has led some people to perpetrate acts like this: "Some Westerners say that Islam is a backward and violent religion and have assaulted the character of our Prophet. In retaliation for this vile behavior of saying that we have a violent religion, I will blow up the Danish Embassy, myself, and a host of innocent bystanders, many of whom may be Muslim." Of course, this is a sick and twisted minority that in no way represents the vast community of Muslims and their interpretation of Islam. Yet, when such things happen, i.e. these senseless acts of violence, people do not pour into the streets in condemnation in the way that they condemned the original cartoons, or the movie "Fitna," or the teacher in Sudan who named a teddy bear "Mohammed." The Muslim community (the Ummah) must realize that the people who are doing the most damage to their religion are not the crack-pot Westerners like Geert Wilders, but the extremist Muslims who provide these critics with so much fuel. If there were no suicide bombers like the one in Pakistan, there would be much less criticism of Islam in the West. I know that the religion and how people choose to interpret it and use it politically are two very different things, but Muslims must rise up to defend their religion against the people within their community who corrupt it and tarnish its image as vocally, if not more vocally than they defend the religion against outside critics.
In my travels, I have talked to a large number of people from a variety of countries and backgrounds. Most have been kind and helpful. Many have engaged me in conversation about their religion, regional politics, and my country's foreign policy. All too often, when I have attempted to face this criticism by finding a middle ground where we can admit that both sides have faults and can do much, much more to improve relations, this middle ground is refused. One of my Arab Muslim friends told me that, even from within the community, when he advocates coming to this middle ground and condemning evils in the the Arab and Islamic world as vocally as the evils found in the West, he has often been shouted down and labeled as a traitor.
The rhetorical extremes taken by clerics and editorial commentators, the hate-filled and scholarship-light books and articles available, the spitting-angry demonstrations, and the violence that a minority perpetrate in the name of Islam are all far more damaging to the Ummah than any Western cartoon, or movie, or book could ever be. Why doesn't the Ummah condemn these things inside their community as loudly they do the silly outside influences that really do them no harm? Why do people play into the hands of critics by providing them with more hatred, vitriol, and violence?
The sad thing, beyond the loss of life, is the logic that has led some people to perpetrate acts like this: "Some Westerners say that Islam is a backward and violent religion and have assaulted the character of our Prophet. In retaliation for this vile behavior of saying that we have a violent religion, I will blow up the Danish Embassy, myself, and a host of innocent bystanders, many of whom may be Muslim." Of course, this is a sick and twisted minority that in no way represents the vast community of Muslims and their interpretation of Islam. Yet, when such things happen, i.e. these senseless acts of violence, people do not pour into the streets in condemnation in the way that they condemned the original cartoons, or the movie "Fitna," or the teacher in Sudan who named a teddy bear "Mohammed." The Muslim community (the Ummah) must realize that the people who are doing the most damage to their religion are not the crack-pot Westerners like Geert Wilders, but the extremist Muslims who provide these critics with so much fuel. If there were no suicide bombers like the one in Pakistan, there would be much less criticism of Islam in the West. I know that the religion and how people choose to interpret it and use it politically are two very different things, but Muslims must rise up to defend their religion against the people within their community who corrupt it and tarnish its image as vocally, if not more vocally than they defend the religion against outside critics.
In my travels, I have talked to a large number of people from a variety of countries and backgrounds. Most have been kind and helpful. Many have engaged me in conversation about their religion, regional politics, and my country's foreign policy. All too often, when I have attempted to face this criticism by finding a middle ground where we can admit that both sides have faults and can do much, much more to improve relations, this middle ground is refused. One of my Arab Muslim friends told me that, even from within the community, when he advocates coming to this middle ground and condemning evils in the the Arab and Islamic world as vocally as the evils found in the West, he has often been shouted down and labeled as a traitor.
The rhetorical extremes taken by clerics and editorial commentators, the hate-filled and scholarship-light books and articles available, the spitting-angry demonstrations, and the violence that a minority perpetrate in the name of Islam are all far more damaging to the Ummah than any Western cartoon, or movie, or book could ever be. Why doesn't the Ummah condemn these things inside their community as loudly they do the silly outside influences that really do them no harm? Why do people play into the hands of critics by providing them with more hatred, vitriol, and violence?
Friday, May 30, 2008
Oil, Oil Everywhere
WSJ reports that despite rising oil prices (57% last year), top oil exporters' shipments dropped by 2.5% last year and are expected to trend similarly this year. This is a major aspect behind the continued high oil prices.
There are several phenomena behind this drop in exports. First, is the declining outputs from aging fields in some countries. As oil fields age, it takes more effort and energy to extract it, slowing exports down. Second, investment in new fields and technology is slowing in some areas due to economic troubles and rising taxation on new developments. Third, increasing internal demand for oil in producing countries is eating into their exports.
In places like Saudi, UAE, and I'd imagine Oman, too, rising development and lower-than-expected natural gas supplies is making states eat into their oil exports in order to fuel their own needs. It probably doesn't help that, in many places, developments are audacious in their energy consumption and that energy subsidies encourage profligacy.
Add to this the commonly discussed rising demand from China and India, and its no wonder that oil prices are so high. While some commentators in other venues are saying that oil can't stay this high over the medium-term, an analyst quoted in the article stated, "The sense in the market is that peak oil is here and that things will only get worse, but the verdict is still out on that."
Peak oil is the not-so-magical point at which oil production begins to decline permanently as we head toward depletion of the resource. When this happens, there will have to be some major adjustments to nearly every aspect of economic and industrial life in the world.
I read Karl Polyani's The Great Transformation a while ago. It is a cheery little book. In it, Polyani argues that nineteenth-century civilization and the Hundred Years' Peace rested on the balance of power system, the international gold standard, the self-regulating market, and the liberal state. When the economic foundations of this system came crashing down, the political system that had been built to perpetuate them was thrown into upheaval in the form of the most destructive war the world had ever seen (World War II).
I haven't thought long and hard enough about this, but it seems to me that a lot of the same conditions are present today. Oil is not equivalent to the gold standard, but going off oil will be somewhat similar economically and will probably throw the global economic system into turmoil. Furthermore, while many of the developed states have created sustainable social protections against the self-regulating market in the wake of WWII, many developing nations face the same struggles as to whether labor is to be treated as a freely-traded commodity or not. Polyani argues that the differing types of social protections created by states in the beginning of the twentieth century was behind the World War. This argument is furthered by a huge book called The Shield of Achilles by Philip Bobbitt. I think that these phenomenon may come to a head as oil starts to run out. Could there be another great transformation ahead?
There are several phenomena behind this drop in exports. First, is the declining outputs from aging fields in some countries. As oil fields age, it takes more effort and energy to extract it, slowing exports down. Second, investment in new fields and technology is slowing in some areas due to economic troubles and rising taxation on new developments. Third, increasing internal demand for oil in producing countries is eating into their exports.
In places like Saudi, UAE, and I'd imagine Oman, too, rising development and lower-than-expected natural gas supplies is making states eat into their oil exports in order to fuel their own needs. It probably doesn't help that, in many places, developments are audacious in their energy consumption and that energy subsidies encourage profligacy.
Add to this the commonly discussed rising demand from China and India, and its no wonder that oil prices are so high. While some commentators in other venues are saying that oil can't stay this high over the medium-term, an analyst quoted in the article stated, "The sense in the market is that peak oil is here and that things will only get worse, but the verdict is still out on that."
Peak oil is the not-so-magical point at which oil production begins to decline permanently as we head toward depletion of the resource. When this happens, there will have to be some major adjustments to nearly every aspect of economic and industrial life in the world.
I read Karl Polyani's The Great Transformation a while ago. It is a cheery little book. In it, Polyani argues that nineteenth-century civilization and the Hundred Years' Peace rested on the balance of power system, the international gold standard, the self-regulating market, and the liberal state. When the economic foundations of this system came crashing down, the political system that had been built to perpetuate them was thrown into upheaval in the form of the most destructive war the world had ever seen (World War II).
I haven't thought long and hard enough about this, but it seems to me that a lot of the same conditions are present today. Oil is not equivalent to the gold standard, but going off oil will be somewhat similar economically and will probably throw the global economic system into turmoil. Furthermore, while many of the developed states have created sustainable social protections against the self-regulating market in the wake of WWII, many developing nations face the same struggles as to whether labor is to be treated as a freely-traded commodity or not. Polyani argues that the differing types of social protections created by states in the beginning of the twentieth century was behind the World War. This argument is furthered by a huge book called The Shield of Achilles by Philip Bobbitt. I think that these phenomenon may come to a head as oil starts to run out. Could there be another great transformation ahead?
Thursday, May 29, 2008
More on Currencies
News Briefs Oman just posted an article about inflation, which mentioned the same indications I mentioned in an earlier post that the U.S. may be giving a subtle green light to currency revaluation in the Gulf.
A Gulf News article is quoted in the post as saying, "If any country is found to be a currency manipulator, it is required to hold talks with the US government." The GN article goes on to state that only one country, China, has been labeled a currency manipulator and that was fourteen years ago, but this is not mentioned in the NBO post. I think that the verbiage that a country is "required" to hold talks is a bit of an overstatement of the power of the U.S. The U.S. cannot require any country to hold talks against its will, unless there is some sort of treaty obligation. Also, dropping the quote out of the context of the GN article, which also references one provision of the law without providing its legal context, gives a false impression of the evil big brother U.S.
The quote references U.S. Public Law 100-148, "The Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988." In section 3004, it states:
"The Secretary of the Treasury shall analyze on an annual basis the exchange rate policies of foreign countries, in consultation with the International Monetary Fund, and consider whether countries manipulate the rate of exchange between their currency and the United States dollar for purposes of preventing effective balance of payments adjustments or gaining unfair competitive advantage in international trade. If the Secretary considers that such manipulation is occurring with respect to countries that (1) have material global current account surpluses; and (2) have significant bilateral trade surpluses with the United States, the Secretary of the Treasury shall take action to initiate negotiations with such foreign countries on an expedited basis, in the International Monetary Fund or bilaterally, for the purpose of ensuring that such countries regularly and promptly adjust the rate of exchange between their currencies and the United States dollar to permit effective balance of payments
adjustments and to eliminate the unfair advantage."
China, for comparison, has a significant bilateral trade surplus with the U.S.: $256 billion in 2007. Oman had a trade deficit of $18.4 million in 2007. UAE's trade deficit was $10 million. Saudi Arabia, due to its oil exports I imagine, had a trade surplus of $25 billion. Bahrain has a very small trade surplus. Therefore, the provisions of the U.S. law, which are not binding on the Gulf countries, do not even apply in the case of most GCC countries. I believe it would be extremely hard to label any GCC state as a currency manipulator in the case of a revaluation anyway. For instance, Kuwait does have a trade surplus of $1.6 billion, but it has already revalued its currency and has not gotten any wrist-slaps from the U.S.
So, I think that the U.S. was encouraging the Gulf countries to hold out on revaluation as long as they could, but the writing is on the wall at this point. And "encouraging" is probably a lot more accurate regarding U.S. power than "requiring." Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think that the U.S. asked and the Gulf leaders decided to oblige up to a point. If anyone has any insights or corrections to my economic ramblings (I'm on thin ice with my economic knowledge here) please comment.
A Gulf News article is quoted in the post as saying, "If any country is found to be a currency manipulator, it is required to hold talks with the US government." The GN article goes on to state that only one country, China, has been labeled a currency manipulator and that was fourteen years ago, but this is not mentioned in the NBO post. I think that the verbiage that a country is "required" to hold talks is a bit of an overstatement of the power of the U.S. The U.S. cannot require any country to hold talks against its will, unless there is some sort of treaty obligation. Also, dropping the quote out of the context of the GN article, which also references one provision of the law without providing its legal context, gives a false impression of the evil big brother U.S.
The quote references U.S. Public Law 100-148, "The Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988." In section 3004, it states:
"The Secretary of the Treasury shall analyze on an annual basis the exchange rate policies of foreign countries, in consultation with the International Monetary Fund, and consider whether countries manipulate the rate of exchange between their currency and the United States dollar for purposes of preventing effective balance of payments adjustments or gaining unfair competitive advantage in international trade. If the Secretary considers that such manipulation is occurring with respect to countries that (1) have material global current account surpluses; and (2) have significant bilateral trade surpluses with the United States, the Secretary of the Treasury shall take action to initiate negotiations with such foreign countries on an expedited basis, in the International Monetary Fund or bilaterally, for the purpose of ensuring that such countries regularly and promptly adjust the rate of exchange between their currencies and the United States dollar to permit effective balance of payments
adjustments and to eliminate the unfair advantage."
China, for comparison, has a significant bilateral trade surplus with the U.S.: $256 billion in 2007. Oman had a trade deficit of $18.4 million in 2007. UAE's trade deficit was $10 million. Saudi Arabia, due to its oil exports I imagine, had a trade surplus of $25 billion. Bahrain has a very small trade surplus. Therefore, the provisions of the U.S. law, which are not binding on the Gulf countries, do not even apply in the case of most GCC countries. I believe it would be extremely hard to label any GCC state as a currency manipulator in the case of a revaluation anyway. For instance, Kuwait does have a trade surplus of $1.6 billion, but it has already revalued its currency and has not gotten any wrist-slaps from the U.S.
So, I think that the U.S. was encouraging the Gulf countries to hold out on revaluation as long as they could, but the writing is on the wall at this point. And "encouraging" is probably a lot more accurate regarding U.S. power than "requiring." Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think that the U.S. asked and the Gulf leaders decided to oblige up to a point. If anyone has any insights or corrections to my economic ramblings (I'm on thin ice with my economic knowledge here) please comment.
Rachel Ray, Terrorist Sympathizer
In a piece of completely asinine news from the U.S., Rachel Ray has been accused of sympathizing with terrorists because she wore a black-and-white kaffiyeh as a scarf for a photo in a Dunkin Donuts ad. (The conservative whackos who got up in arms about that would really be up in arms to know that DD is coming to a crazy Arab country like Oman).
I'll refrain from naming the conservative ass who "broke" the story in a blog just because I do not want to help with her personal publicity, but she says that the traditional Palestinian kaffiyeh has come to symbolize Muslim extremism and terrorism. Now, I have absolutely no tolerance for the sick and twisted brands of extremism that come out of the Middle East, but in my opinion, all of these people are cut of the same cloth. Their ideologies, self-righteousness, polemics, paranoid conspiracy theories, etc. are all very similar, but they just serve different selfish goals. Of course, the "Islamic" terrorists use violence, but I really think that the difference is not the ideology, but the situation. If these American whackos had grown up in Palestine, they'd be sicko terrorists too.
So, what needs to happen, is someone needs to invent a biometric whacko scanner. We scan everyone and send all the people who scan positive as whackos from all over the world to a fenced off area in the desert somewhere about the size of Gaza and let them work their ideological differences out. It wouldn't create world peace, but it definitely would rid us of the more ridiculous rhetoric out there. (By the way, the use of the phrase "sons of pigs and monkeys" when referring to a whole category of people qualifies you for the trip.)
As for Americans, they need to wake up and condemn the stupidity of commentators like this. It is this sort of extremism that plays right into the hands of the enemy (by enemy, I mean the enemy who kills innocent people, who bullies his own, and who uses the flag of righteousness to cover up his own greed and power-lust, not everyone the enemy looks like). As for the rest of the world, they need to do the same. Clean up your own playpen and stop blaming other people for your own faults, then maybe everyone can work together to find amenable solutions for major problems. Its impossible to work issues out when whole groups of people refuse to condemn idiotic, polemical rhetoric that sounds like the logic of an elementary school bully who can't read.
I'll refrain from naming the conservative ass who "broke" the story in a blog just because I do not want to help with her personal publicity, but she says that the traditional Palestinian kaffiyeh has come to symbolize Muslim extremism and terrorism. Now, I have absolutely no tolerance for the sick and twisted brands of extremism that come out of the Middle East, but in my opinion, all of these people are cut of the same cloth. Their ideologies, self-righteousness, polemics, paranoid conspiracy theories, etc. are all very similar, but they just serve different selfish goals. Of course, the "Islamic" terrorists use violence, but I really think that the difference is not the ideology, but the situation. If these American whackos had grown up in Palestine, they'd be sicko terrorists too.
So, what needs to happen, is someone needs to invent a biometric whacko scanner. We scan everyone and send all the people who scan positive as whackos from all over the world to a fenced off area in the desert somewhere about the size of Gaza and let them work their ideological differences out. It wouldn't create world peace, but it definitely would rid us of the more ridiculous rhetoric out there. (By the way, the use of the phrase "sons of pigs and monkeys" when referring to a whole category of people qualifies you for the trip.)
As for Americans, they need to wake up and condemn the stupidity of commentators like this. It is this sort of extremism that plays right into the hands of the enemy (by enemy, I mean the enemy who kills innocent people, who bullies his own, and who uses the flag of righteousness to cover up his own greed and power-lust, not everyone the enemy looks like). As for the rest of the world, they need to do the same. Clean up your own playpen and stop blaming other people for your own faults, then maybe everyone can work together to find amenable solutions for major problems. Its impossible to work issues out when whole groups of people refuse to condemn idiotic, polemical rhetoric that sounds like the logic of an elementary school bully who can't read.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Complimentary SUV Parking Spots
I think its great that City Center has provided complimentary SUV parking spots in its garage. Its hard to see from this picture (the guy was getting in his car and I didn't want to cause any problems or have issues with getting the liscencse plate in the pic) but these nifty spots have enough room (about a shopping cart's width) to put the driver's side tires on pavement, with the other tires up on the curb. This allows people with big new SUVs to park right up near the entry doors, while also making sure their suspension is getting the exercise it needs.
American malls need to get on the ball and start offering these parking spots, as we all know that it would be the most intense off-roading experience most U.S. SUVs or trucks ever face.
Now, be sure not to put your shopping cart behind these SUVs, as the high ride and slight tilt mean that the driver won't be able to see it. Place the cart in its proper spot: behind the small white car a few spots down.
Green Light to Drop Dollar Peg?
MEED reports that the U.S. has effectively given GCC countries the green light to drop their dollar peg, according to an analysis of U.S. Treasury statements by Merrill Lynch. The report estimates that Qatar and UAE will move to a currency basket peg within a few months.
If the GCC does not move in concert, serious currency speculation may be in store.
The news was quickly picked up in Oman. It was the subject of today's "Iba'd Iqtisadiya" on Radio Sultanate of Oman, a daily economic analysis piece.
If the GCC does not move in concert, serious currency speculation may be in store.
The news was quickly picked up in Oman. It was the subject of today's "Iba'd Iqtisadiya" on Radio Sultanate of Oman, a daily economic analysis piece.
Monday, May 26, 2008
Expats Thinking About a Contract in Saudi?
If you have kids, do some research on recent policy changes. SaudiJeans reports that the Saudi Ministry of Education has declared that Saudis will no longer be granted permission to attend international schools and that international students will have to attend the school corresponding to their nationality. I did not find a news story on the decision itself, but SaudiJeans linked a letter published on the Arab News website from a mother objecting to the decision.
If the decision is not recognized as the train wreck that it is and rescinded, I imagine the international school system in Saudi will be quite a mess over the next few years if it is anything like Oman where students are jumbled up according to their educational preferences more than nationality.
In the post, there is a picture of the Minister of Education, the head of the notoriously religiously conservative education ministry. He does not wear the ghutra, the black cord that the majority of Gulf Arabs wear to keep the shemagh (the scarf) in place. My understanding is that this is a statement: conservative Muslims of a certain milieu don't wear the ghutra because only God wears a crown. The Vice and Virtue "Police" also don't wear ghutras.
If the decision is not recognized as the train wreck that it is and rescinded, I imagine the international school system in Saudi will be quite a mess over the next few years if it is anything like Oman where students are jumbled up according to their educational preferences more than nationality.
In the post, there is a picture of the Minister of Education, the head of the notoriously religiously conservative education ministry. He does not wear the ghutra, the black cord that the majority of Gulf Arabs wear to keep the shemagh (the scarf) in place. My understanding is that this is a statement: conservative Muslims of a certain milieu don't wear the ghutra because only God wears a crown. The Vice and Virtue "Police" also don't wear ghutras.
What's Hot at Borders
Here's what's hot at Borders. A few of the titles on their display table in the Arabic section:
Facing toward the storefront (top picture)
-Top row left to right: a book about Sultan Qaboos (head of state of Oman), "Mussolini" (I forget the subtitle), "Rasputin," "Zionist Leaders," "New York and the Reign of Fear."
-Top row left to right: a book about Sultan Qaboos (head of state of Oman), "Mussolini" (I forget the subtitle), "Rasputin," "Zionist Leaders," "New York and the Reign of Fear."
-2nd row: something about spies, something about the execution of Arab leaders, "Saddam Wasn't Executed: ???, American Lies and the Game of Look-Alikes" (وعدي وقصي لم يقتلا أكاذيب أمريكا ولعبة الشبيه), last book on right "Nuclear Secrets."
-3rd row: "Armageddon: The End of America and Israel," "Osama," ?, "Behind Every Dictator is a...," I forget the last title, but there is a picture of Condi Rice, George Bush, and Dick Cheney on the cover and the top copy had a bunch of x's scratched over Bush's face.
-Bottom row: "Diary of an Arab Diplomat," "Evildoers/Malcontents of History," "Political Assassinations," "Saddam Wasn't Executed," "A Spy in the President's Palace" (with a black Star of David on the cover).
Facing to the rear: (bottom pic)
-Top row, left to right from 2nd book: "Censorship and Redaction (blacking out information) in the American Press," "Years of Hope," "Stalin (I forget the subtitle and can't make it out)" and "Karl Marx, Man Against Religions."
-Middle row, from 2nd book: "Arab Banana Republics," "Loss/Ruin of Nations," translation of former U.S. Congressman Paul Findlay's "They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel's Lobby."
-Bottom row, from 2nd book (again): "The Israeli Lobby," Hitler's "Mein Kampf," "Blackwater: Armies of Darkness/Oppression," and the last one is something about changes in the Arabian peninsula, but I forget the details.
And the for the Grand Prize:
Grammatically and semantically, this translation may not be perfect, but the essence is there. If anyone has any suggestions, please comment. I'm not making this up:
"Speeding the Emergence of the Anti-Christ: Zionism and Devil Worship Pave the Way for the Emergence of the Anti-Christ with his Flying Saucers from the Bermuda Triangle."
Grammatically and semantically, this translation may not be perfect, but the essence is there. If anyone has any suggestions, please comment. I'm not making this up:
"Speeding the Emergence of the Anti-Christ: Zionism and Devil Worship Pave the Way for the Emergence of the Anti-Christ with his Flying Saucers from the Bermuda Triangle."
Saudi Virtue
The BBC wrote about the outrage of human rights groups when charges against a Saudi couple for, amongst other things, tying their maid up outside for a month with and leaving her without food for some time were dropped. This came in after a see-saw of court rulings that at one point had the maid sentenced to 79 lashes for falsely accusing her employers. The abuse was so bad that she lost several digits to gangrene, so its not like the case was hard to prove.
While such abuse is certainly not widespread, it is also not unheard-of in Saudi and the Gulf in general. As I've said elsewhere, it astounds me that, in a culture where dressing provocatively is haram, there is not a greater outcry against domestic abuse of all kinds.
While such abuse is certainly not widespread, it is also not unheard-of in Saudi and the Gulf in general. As I've said elsewhere, it astounds me that, in a culture where dressing provocatively is haram, there is not a greater outcry against domestic abuse of all kinds.
Sunday, May 25, 2008
Carpooling in UAE
There was a recent post at the UAE Community Blog regarding new regulations on legal carpooling. The full details can be found at the link, but to make a long story short, in an effort supposedly aimed at cutting down on illegal taxis, UAE authorities have created a laborious registration scheme, by which normal carpooling workers can register a car and no more than a total of 4 passengers to be official carpoolers. The authorities will do background checks on all concerned, then grant a permit. Any carpooling outside of these restrictions would be illegal.
A few points:
-Let's assume that the big-brother-esque aspect of the background checks is just well-intentioned but overzealous bureaucracy.
-If the intention is to protect citizens from illegal taxis, wouldn't other measures be much more efficient and effective than the very laborious and bureaucratically-expensive registration process? Undercover stings on the taxis? Simple surveillance of likely pick-up spots? Provision of more official taxis to meet the demand?
This falls in on the previous post about Gulf branding. If UAE wants to become a global business hub, it has to quickly realize that it needs to make bureaucratic procedures and daily life more efficient and less intrusive, not more so.
It will be interesting to see how this shakes out and whether the bureaucracy is responsive to the moans of protest it is raising. If the government can be adaptive in this and many other situations, then the UAE business model has a chance. If the government keeps putting stumbling blocks in front of business and doesn't adapt to complaints, all those pretty high rises are going to be looking shabby and empty before too long.
A few points:
-Let's assume that the big-brother-esque aspect of the background checks is just well-intentioned but overzealous bureaucracy.
-If the intention is to protect citizens from illegal taxis, wouldn't other measures be much more efficient and effective than the very laborious and bureaucratically-expensive registration process? Undercover stings on the taxis? Simple surveillance of likely pick-up spots? Provision of more official taxis to meet the demand?
This falls in on the previous post about Gulf branding. If UAE wants to become a global business hub, it has to quickly realize that it needs to make bureaucratic procedures and daily life more efficient and less intrusive, not more so.
It will be interesting to see how this shakes out and whether the bureaucracy is responsive to the moans of protest it is raising. If the government can be adaptive in this and many other situations, then the UAE business model has a chance. If the government keeps putting stumbling blocks in front of business and doesn't adapt to complaints, all those pretty high rises are going to be looking shabby and empty before too long.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Muscat Anger Sharks
A trip to Lulu on a bright, hot Friday morning got the anger sharks swimming in my head. The throng of people inside was OK, but the parking lot was what set me over the edge. In Oman, we seem to have a tradition of placing our shopping carts/trolleys behind other peoples' cars so they have to move your cart and theirs to pull their car out. Well, this art form is being taken to new heights of breathtaking arrogance and self-centered-ness. There were, no kidding, clumps of 15 to 20 carts stacked strategically behind a few cars out of every row near the store. So the poor bastard whose car the cart stack is centered on will have about 20 minutes of clearing carts in 110 degree weather with over 80 percent humidity before he or she can pull out.
I saw one person in the act, an Indian lady (I'm sure all races and creeds are well-represented in this act so don't get offended), shoving a cart into the stack. I stopped my car and asked why she thought it was OK to put her cart behind someone else's car. In typical logic, she got mad at me and said it wasn't her cart. Ok, so someone put their cart behind her car, so she fixed it, not by putting it somewhere between cars or in the lane where carts can be put without blocking anyone, but by screwing someone else over (the guy with 15 carts behind his car already). Now, I'm sure she was astounded that I stopped to say something, because no one does that. But, in typical fashion, the guy behind me started honking about 2 seconds after I stopped because its OK to be a total confrontational ass when you are surrounded by metal.
I would give a month's pay to see some young, gym rat, Omani guy with biceps the size of my thighs catch someone in the act and then throw the cart through the offender's back window. A few random acts of confrontational kindness like this would go a long way toward making people think twice before inconveniencing someone else with their cart. Now taking a step back from anger shark fantasy land, next time you see someone do this, try something like kindly asking them not to inconvenience others, or simply pushing the cart out of the way to set the example. If you are someone who does this, take a second out of your narrow, self-centered life and think about whether you would like to be the person spending your morning in the heat clearing away 20 carts so you can pull out of the supermarket.
I really just can't understand the mindset and the lack of concern for others that prompts people to inconvenience each other so freely...
I saw one person in the act, an Indian lady (I'm sure all races and creeds are well-represented in this act so don't get offended), shoving a cart into the stack. I stopped my car and asked why she thought it was OK to put her cart behind someone else's car. In typical logic, she got mad at me and said it wasn't her cart. Ok, so someone put their cart behind her car, so she fixed it, not by putting it somewhere between cars or in the lane where carts can be put without blocking anyone, but by screwing someone else over (the guy with 15 carts behind his car already). Now, I'm sure she was astounded that I stopped to say something, because no one does that. But, in typical fashion, the guy behind me started honking about 2 seconds after I stopped because its OK to be a total confrontational ass when you are surrounded by metal.
I would give a month's pay to see some young, gym rat, Omani guy with biceps the size of my thighs catch someone in the act and then throw the cart through the offender's back window. A few random acts of confrontational kindness like this would go a long way toward making people think twice before inconveniencing someone else with their cart. Now taking a step back from anger shark fantasy land, next time you see someone do this, try something like kindly asking them not to inconvenience others, or simply pushing the cart out of the way to set the example. If you are someone who does this, take a second out of your narrow, self-centered life and think about whether you would like to be the person spending your morning in the heat clearing away 20 carts so you can pull out of the supermarket.
I really just can't understand the mindset and the lack of concern for others that prompts people to inconvenience each other so freely...
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Tranquil Oman
Oman fared well in the Economist Intelligence Unit's rankings for "peace and security," coming in at 1st place among Arab countries, 3rd in Asia, and 22nd worldwide.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Gulf Branding
Secret Dubai Diary posted some very thought provoking comments regarding what countries of the region, especially Dubai, will need to do in order to build a lasting tourism sector.
If the Gulf countries really want to capitalize on tourism revenues (or thrive as a global business hub for that matter), it seems there will be some thorny issues to consider, as Secret Dubai Diary points out. Who will want to walk around attractions like Dubailand on holiday in the heat if they cannot have a bottle of water and an ice cream cone? How will business address the fall of revenue as visitors shy away when Ramadan hits at peak times? I'm not sure of the laws in Dubai, but if these businesses are able to get permission to serve food and drink in the day during Ramadan, will there be blow-back from sectors of the Muslim population? Booze is less of an issue, but when non-Muslims consider paying the big bucks it takes to stay in Dubai for holiday, many people will decide to go elsewhere if they can't tip a few to unwind from their stressful lives.
At a more subtle level, I have heard and read many comments of both citizens and expats who get indignant about how visitors to Dubai dress (i.e. scantily clad women in the malls). I'm a bit torn on this. I feel like I am a guest living in Oman, so I have no problem respecting the local culture. Yet, when I go to Dubai, a place that wants to make revenue off of drawing in visitors from all over the world who pay ridiculous amounts to stay there, I feel as if people should be a bit more at liberty to dress and do as they please. If the citizens of Dubai feel differently, they and their leadership are going to have to do some serious soul-searching as to whether they want to become a global brand and sell their soul for the massive revenues or hold on to their conservatism and find another way to make money. They may have already crossed the Rubicon, though, as the massive amount of speculatory construction there is going to demand continued economic development to stave off an implosion.
It seems to me that Oman's tourism model is a bit different. Whereas Dubai is making itself up in the model of cities that are decidedly not conservative (who hasn't heard a comparison of Dubai to "Sin City" Las Vegas), Oman is trying to attract people to its natural beauty and quiet traditional settings. In this, Oman does not have to give up quite as much of its identity to draw people to this niche market.
In a related story on Gulf brands, Al-Jazeera English is having a difficult time breaking into the critical American market. That's no surprise. I haven't watched AJ English much. I find AJ Arabic to be less of the devil-child than many Americans make it out to be, especially when you consider the audience it is aimed at. If you look at the differences between CNN and FoxNews, and realize that their audiences think that both are fair and balanced, you have to imagine that Arab audiences are going to demand a much different spin for their news. This is all well and good if AJ is a brand for the Arab world. If AJ wants to become a global brand, it has quite a bit of work to do to clean up its image in the West. Marketing and business have little to do with fairness. If you please one market by pissing another market off, don't expect the other market to come running to you just because you start broadcasting in their language. Again, the question is: do you want to give up some of your freedom to be provocative in order to make money as a global brand or do you want to maintain what you see as your integrity at the expense of revenue?
If the Gulf countries really want to capitalize on tourism revenues (or thrive as a global business hub for that matter), it seems there will be some thorny issues to consider, as Secret Dubai Diary points out. Who will want to walk around attractions like Dubailand on holiday in the heat if they cannot have a bottle of water and an ice cream cone? How will business address the fall of revenue as visitors shy away when Ramadan hits at peak times? I'm not sure of the laws in Dubai, but if these businesses are able to get permission to serve food and drink in the day during Ramadan, will there be blow-back from sectors of the Muslim population? Booze is less of an issue, but when non-Muslims consider paying the big bucks it takes to stay in Dubai for holiday, many people will decide to go elsewhere if they can't tip a few to unwind from their stressful lives.
At a more subtle level, I have heard and read many comments of both citizens and expats who get indignant about how visitors to Dubai dress (i.e. scantily clad women in the malls). I'm a bit torn on this. I feel like I am a guest living in Oman, so I have no problem respecting the local culture. Yet, when I go to Dubai, a place that wants to make revenue off of drawing in visitors from all over the world who pay ridiculous amounts to stay there, I feel as if people should be a bit more at liberty to dress and do as they please. If the citizens of Dubai feel differently, they and their leadership are going to have to do some serious soul-searching as to whether they want to become a global brand and sell their soul for the massive revenues or hold on to their conservatism and find another way to make money. They may have already crossed the Rubicon, though, as the massive amount of speculatory construction there is going to demand continued economic development to stave off an implosion.
It seems to me that Oman's tourism model is a bit different. Whereas Dubai is making itself up in the model of cities that are decidedly not conservative (who hasn't heard a comparison of Dubai to "Sin City" Las Vegas), Oman is trying to attract people to its natural beauty and quiet traditional settings. In this, Oman does not have to give up quite as much of its identity to draw people to this niche market.
In a related story on Gulf brands, Al-Jazeera English is having a difficult time breaking into the critical American market. That's no surprise. I haven't watched AJ English much. I find AJ Arabic to be less of the devil-child than many Americans make it out to be, especially when you consider the audience it is aimed at. If you look at the differences between CNN and FoxNews, and realize that their audiences think that both are fair and balanced, you have to imagine that Arab audiences are going to demand a much different spin for their news. This is all well and good if AJ is a brand for the Arab world. If AJ wants to become a global brand, it has quite a bit of work to do to clean up its image in the West. Marketing and business have little to do with fairness. If you please one market by pissing another market off, don't expect the other market to come running to you just because you start broadcasting in their language. Again, the question is: do you want to give up some of your freedom to be provocative in order to make money as a global brand or do you want to maintain what you see as your integrity at the expense of revenue?
Inflation in Oman Hits 11.5%
Inflation in Oman hit 11.5% in March, the highest level in 18 years. There are numerous economic explanations for this. What is the buzz around Oman as to why the prices are rising so quickly and how it should be addressed?
Economic theory is great, but public perception is a much stronger guide as to how people will react to continued high prices and at whom they point the finger...
Economic theory is great, but public perception is a much stronger guide as to how people will react to continued high prices and at whom they point the finger...
The Sixtieth Anniversary of the Nakba
Al-Watan published an editorial on the sixtieth anniversary of the Nakba today. The Nakba is the catastrophe of the Palestinians who left and were ejected from their lands as the Israeli state was established in 1948. Interestingly, the editorial strikes an uncompromising tone saying that "the Palestinians have a deep understanding that they will inevitably return [to their lands] carrying the keys of their houses of old." A recent Brookings Institution/Zogby poll found that 73 percent of Arabs polled are ready for a "just and comprehensive peace with Israel if Israel is willing to return all the territories occupied in the 1967 war including East Jerusalem," although 52 percent do not believe this will ever happen. The poll did not address the right of return, but 19 percent of those polled said that Arabs should continue the fight even if Israel returns the lands occupied in '67. So, with the sixtieth anniversary upon us, it seems there is little consensus, even rhetorically, as to what is expected and what is desired to end the conflict. Do people truly believe that the Palestinians will inevitably return to their homes of old? Is this possible?
On another note, I read Leo Africanus by Amin Maalouf recently on a trip through Andalusia and Morocco. One passage struck me. Leo's uncle, an Andalusian notable, speaking of his unwillingness to tell Andalusian exiles in Fes that they will never return to their homes, says, “Perhaps one day it may be necessary for someone to dare to teach them to look unflinchingly at their defeat, to explain to them that in order to get to one’s feet again one must first admit that one is down on the ground. Perhaps someone will have to tell them the truth one day. But I myself do not have the courage to do so.”
On another note, I read Leo Africanus by Amin Maalouf recently on a trip through Andalusia and Morocco. One passage struck me. Leo's uncle, an Andalusian notable, speaking of his unwillingness to tell Andalusian exiles in Fes that they will never return to their homes, says, “Perhaps one day it may be necessary for someone to dare to teach them to look unflinchingly at their defeat, to explain to them that in order to get to one’s feet again one must first admit that one is down on the ground. Perhaps someone will have to tell them the truth one day. But I myself do not have the courage to do so.”
Saturday, May 17, 2008
NYT Baghdad Blog - Great improvements in Iraq, but will they last?
The New York Times has an interesting Baghdad blog with entries frequently written by its Iraqi staffers. The latest entry was written by an Iraqi who recently visited Basra. He notes significant improvements in security and stability there since February (other posts have noted similar improvements in other areas). Yet, from his own observations and the comments of Basra residents, it seems that the Mahdi Army is just biding its time, waiting until the Iraqi Army pulls out so they can move back in.
Serious progress has been made. Rogue elements of the Mahdi Army have been targeted and Sadr has kept up his truce, grudgingly. Many Sunni insurgent groups have become the "Sons of Iraq" like minutemen fighting the extremists. But... they all still have their guns and their organizations are intact. Without political progress and the growth of governmental capacity, this progress could easily be lost in a few weeks of violence. One person with access to key people on both the American and Iraqi sides said recently something to the effect of, "Its not that something could happen to set off the violence again, its that the violence will return if nothing happens" in the form of reconciliation and governmental progress.
Serious progress has been made. Rogue elements of the Mahdi Army have been targeted and Sadr has kept up his truce, grudgingly. Many Sunni insurgent groups have become the "Sons of Iraq" like minutemen fighting the extremists. But... they all still have their guns and their organizations are intact. Without political progress and the growth of governmental capacity, this progress could easily be lost in a few weeks of violence. One person with access to key people on both the American and Iraqi sides said recently something to the effect of, "Its not that something could happen to set off the violence again, its that the violence will return if nothing happens" in the form of reconciliation and governmental progress.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Ali al-Wardi Books in Muscat?
Does anyone know if/where I might find books by the Iraqi sociologist Ali al-Wardi in Muscat? I'm looking for them in Arabic, but haven't really tried all that hard yet. I imagine it would have to be a specialty bookstore and I don't really know where one might be.
Love in Saudi Arabia
The New York Times has recently published some articles and blog entries on love, life, and the pursuit of happiness for young people in Saudi Arabia. The conservative atmosphere prevents almost all contact between the sexes, leading (as always with young adults) to some creative work-arounds. Saudi guys chase girls around, trying to pass off their phone numbers, for instance as is discussed here. The girls' side of things is here. The boys' is here.
Young men, especially, chafe under these restrictions, not only because they want to chase girls, but also because there's not a whole lot else for them to do. There are few jobs that Saudi teens can do and there are few other outlets. They are barred from many malls as single males, there aren't any movie theaters, and precious few sports clubs. Beside chasing girls around and "numbering" them, many guys head out to the highways and streets to "drift" (tefheet in Arabic). This is a crazy past-time in which they zoom around in small Eastern cars, skidding and sliding on the pavement. This usually happens at night. During the daytime you can see the skid marks on prime sections of road and parking lots.
While many might think that the young men who grew up longing for more opportunities might change things later on down the line, a lot of men, once they have families, want to keep hoodlums like they used to be away from their girls. I've talked to more than one Saudi dad who loved the chance to get away and enjoy himself outside the Kingdom, for example, but were not interested in taking their daughters into such an environment. So, are changes in the offing or will things stay the same for some time?
For less conservative Gulf countries, these problems aren't as sharp, but the restrictions and ambitions are still clashing.
Young men, especially, chafe under these restrictions, not only because they want to chase girls, but also because there's not a whole lot else for them to do. There are few jobs that Saudi teens can do and there are few other outlets. They are barred from many malls as single males, there aren't any movie theaters, and precious few sports clubs. Beside chasing girls around and "numbering" them, many guys head out to the highways and streets to "drift" (tefheet in Arabic). This is a crazy past-time in which they zoom around in small Eastern cars, skidding and sliding on the pavement. This usually happens at night. During the daytime you can see the skid marks on prime sections of road and parking lots.
While many might think that the young men who grew up longing for more opportunities might change things later on down the line, a lot of men, once they have families, want to keep hoodlums like they used to be away from their girls. I've talked to more than one Saudi dad who loved the chance to get away and enjoy himself outside the Kingdom, for example, but were not interested in taking their daughters into such an environment. So, are changes in the offing or will things stay the same for some time?
For less conservative Gulf countries, these problems aren't as sharp, but the restrictions and ambitions are still clashing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
