Saudi Arabia – Page 2 – Engaging Peace

By guest author Ian Hansen

As a supporter of human rights and locally-controlled democracy in Iraq, I am dismayed to see Fallujah fall to Al Qaeda.

Al-Qa'ida training manual — Al-Qa’ida training manual, CIA Virtual Museum. Image in public domain, from Wikimedia Commons

Some may see poetic justice for the U.S. in this development: the U.S. war of aggression has clearly backfired in Fallujah. But there’s no justice in it for the people of that historic city. I would have been happy to see Fallujah residents lead a nonviolent civil disobedience movement to regain control over their communities, but the ascendance of Al Qaeda there is a tragedy.

The people of Fallujah have already endured enough massacres, destruction of the city’s ancient buildings and mosques, and chemical weapons horrors from the U.S. siege in 2004. And although the draconian rule of the U.S.-aligned Iraqi Security Forces should be overthrown by local democratic rule, the siege by Al Qaeda is, if anything, a regression, not an improvement.

Al Qaeda is not a progressive organization, and there is nothing redeeming about it. It’s a violent oppressive scourge on Islam in much the same way that the Christian Coalition–and the U.S. military-industrial-ideological machine generally–is a violent and oppressive scourge on Christianity.

It is not a coincidence that Al Qaeda as a movement arises largely from the Arabian Peninsula, most of which is controlled by an oil-rich U.S.-Israeli ally (Saudi Arabia). Saudi Arabia–one of the most draconian autocracies in the Middle East–is playing a disgraceful role in the Syrian disaster right now; it just got around to abolishing slavery in 1962. Al Qaeda is at odds with the Saudi regime in obvious ways, but in other obvious ways Al Qaeda mirrors its core values.

And I don’t think that violent decision-makers in the U.S. actually want Al Qaeda to disappear (though until more evidence pours in, this is more of an accusation against our leadership’s unconscious intentions than their conscious ones).

Even at the time of 9/11, Al Qaeda was originally a pretty paltry and unpopular group. The Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the drone assassinations, and the other Joint Special Operation Command-CIA paramilitary killings all over the world seem to have only magnified Al Qaeda’s international presence.

Ian Hansen, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the Department of Behavioral Sciences at York College, City University of New York. His research focuses in part on how witness for human rights and peace can transcend explicit political ideology. He is also on the Steering Committee for Psychologists for Social Responsibility.

[Note from Kathie Malley-Morrison: Today we welcome the first of several contributions by our guest contributor Majed Ashy. Dr. Ashy is an assistant professor of psychology at Merrimack College and a research fellow in psychiatry at McLean Hospital/Harvard Medical School. He was born in Lebanon and is a Saudi Arabian. He earned his B.A, M.A, and Ph.D. in psychology from Boston University. His research in psychoneuroimmunology and political psychology focuses on childhood experience of adversity and its psychobiological consequences. He authored the Saudi Arabia chapter in State Violence and the Right to Peace: An International Survey of the Views of Ordinary People Greenwood Publishing Group / Praeger series. He is contributing several chapters to two volumes to be published by Springer Publishing Co.: Handbook on War, Torture, and Terrorism, and Handbook on Protest, Peace, Reconciliation, Apology, and Forgiveness.]

By Majed Ashy, Guest Author

Two arguments are presented repeatedly in discussions of the evolution of democracy in the Middle East: “Arabs are not ready for democracy,” and “If Arabs get more democratic rights, then some Islamic extremists will come to power and that is a threat to the whole world.”

Army trucks surrounding Tahrir Square, Cairo (Photo by Ramy Raoof; licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic; from Wikimedia Commons)

I heard similar alarmist arguments against women’s suffrage, African American civil rights movements, and Black liberation in South Africa. President Lincoln, whose birthday is this week, did not accept the arguments against freeing the slaves in America, but millions of people still lack freedom.

With advancements in communication technologies, Internet resources, social networks, media, satellite TV stations, and international travel, the evolution in individual empowerment and the rise of social collective awareness are natural consequences. Masses of people are rejecting as self serving and racist the “old” narratives about the necessity of oppression.

One of the problems faced in the Middle East is the communication gap between governments and the general populations. Many Middle Eastern governments are still using a “language” that does not speak to people who are educated, aware, and able to see through the narratives of oppression. The image of men on camels and horses in Tahrir square in Cairo beating protesters summarize this divide.

We have in the Middle East youth who represent the future, are linked through the Internet to people all over the world, watch satellite TV stations from almost every country, and call for human rights. On the other side we have people who come from the ancient past and deal with their problems by riding camels and beating people up.

The current conflict in the Middle East is about narratives. One narrative that has not been given a chance yet is that the Middle East can evolve into a responsible democracy that takes into account human rights, international law, and democracy. All lovers of freedom and democracy should respect and help sustain this effort.

Majed Ashy