Middle East Policy

Human rights in Syria; Pelosi's silence By Nadim Houry and Radwan Ziadeh Daily Star April 6, 2007 US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's visit to Damascus this week caused quite a stir. Before she even landed in Syria, the White House was calling her decision a "really bad idea." Pelosi's spokesman was quick to defend the visit by saying that the speaker intended to use her trip "to discuss a wide range of security issues affecting the United States and the Middle East." No one doubts that security is essential in the region. But Pelosi appears to have committed the same mistake as other recent visitors to Damascus, who decided not to raise the issue of Syria's appalling human rights record. Pelosi was the most senior American public figure to visit Damascus since Colin Powell visited in 2003 as secretary of state, but she came on the heels of other high-profile visitors. Last weekend, three Republican congressmen, Frank Wolf, Joe Pitts and Robert Ad

Pelosi's Visit to Damascus, a Chapter Within the Jewish Lobby Strategy By Raghida Dergham Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi's visit to Damascus was motivated by a fraction of the Israeli lobby convinced that stimulating Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's interest in striking a deal with Israel would prompt him to break him away from Iran and abandon Hezbollah in Lebanon. The visit came on behalf of the Israeli government and its affiliates, who view the Syrian regime as weak and incapable of inflicting harm, yet the best de facto partner of Israel, since it will never stir up the Syrian-Israeli front, or allow for the emergence of the 'Muslim Brotherhood'. Hence, it stands to represent the wished for separation fence, running along the Syrian-Israeli borders. The visit of the head of the top US legislative body came to the dismay of George W. Bush, the head of the executive body, who is tasked by the Constitution with foreign policy decision-makin

I am posting two reports on the struggle of Iranian women and bloggers for their basic rights abused by the theocratic totalitarian dictatorial regime occupying Iran. Also, I am highlighting the Freedom House's journal on democracy and human rights in Iran, www.gozaar.org : Freedom House launched “ Gozaar ,” a new Persian/English online journal devoted to the discussion of democracy and human rights in Iran. “Gozaar,” which means “transition,” recognizes that free access to ideas and information is the cornerstone of freedom. In response to widespread censorship and the closure of all independent print newspapers in Iran, the journal seeks to help Iranian democrats fulfill the universal aspiration for freedom of expression by creating an inclusive and provocative space for the discussion of liberty. Each issue features interviews, essays, political cartoons, feature articles, satire, and reviews of art, film and literature. A central feature of “Gozaar” is its bi-lingual discussio

They are meant to pave the way to a dynastic transfer of power to Mr Mubarak's son, Gamal. This is the best insightful comment on Egypt's constitutional amendments. Obviously, Mr. Mubarak would not believe that Egypt is not Syria, and he persistently refuses to show respect for his country and people. Moreover, he thinks that by imprisoning bloggers and tailoring laws and constitutional amendments legalizing the police state, his regime has made of Egypt, he can ensure the 'dynastic republic' and then, his boy's forged succession. However, the Egyptians have proved in the referendum day to the entire world that they deserve freedom and democracy when they left voting offices empty. It was really a slap to Arab authoritarianism through the Egyptian regime. I eventually hope that Egypt authoritarians stop after this showdown and public humiliation in front of the watching world made to them by the Egyptian people, and let bloggers and democratic and liberal activist

The UN Security Council unanimously adopted a new resolution (1747) sanctioning Iran on its nuclear program. This question (the Iranian nuclear program) constitutes one of the two key battles in the context of the struggle for the new Middle East; the other is about the Special Tribunal for Lebanon . These two battles are of key importance to the future of the Middle East and for the new Middle East, as I have said before. This resolution is definitely a setback to the anti-democratic Middle East Totalitarian Axis led by the Iranian totalitarian regime. We should be clearly aware that the struggle for freedom and democracy in the Middle East from Iraq and beyond entails change at the geopolitical level in the Middle East . This required geopolitical change is achieved by breaking the Middle East Totalitarian Axis and weakening and containing its pressured components alongside defeating totalitarianism. For an empirical insight into the post-Iraq Middle East, read my article, The Strugg

The Arab Center for the Development of the Rule of Law and Integrity and IFES published two surveys (January 12, 2007) showed that corruption and a lack of independence for journalists, parliamentarians, judges, lawyers, are key concerns identified by survey participants in Egypt, Morocco, Jordan, and Lebanon. This is a summary of the findings: Arabs Speak Out about Democracy in New Reports ifes.org January 30, 2007 Two new reports reveal that an overwhelming majority of Arab citizens in four diverse countries support democratic reform and want to make their courts, media and parliaments more independent. In January, more than 200 Arab officials, judges, lawyers, parliamentarians, journalists, academics and community leaders discussed and debated the reports’ findings during back-to-back conferences in Cairo and Amman. The Arab Center for the Development of the Rule of Law and Integrity, or ACRLI, and IFES sponsored the conferences and compiled the reports under the auspices of the Uni

In honor of this occasion, when the wind of change began blowing in the Middle East; when the freedom bell began ringing; when the long aspiration for freedom and dignity began its path into reality, this is an updated version of my article, Iraq Victory: Middle East Salvation, which had been well quoted in 2005 and 2006 and had been highlighted by the Philadelphia Inquirer in December 2005. Some related articles of mine: - The Neo-Internationalism After 9/11 and Middle East Democratization - The Struggle for the New Middle East - The End of International Isolationism - Defining the Iraqi Question - Totalitarianism, Violence and Terror IRAQ VICTORY: MIDDLE EAST SALVATION By Nassim Yaziji The U.S. will not abandon Iraq. To me, it means that the U.S. will not abandon the Middle East. Some recent stances and statements in the U.S. urging to quit Iraq have shocked me. I find it, and I am sorry for this expression, extremely irresponsible, and definitely harming U.S. interests and the nasc

The annual release of a report on human rights by the U.S. State Department is mandated by law. The report reviews progress and pitfalls around the world—not including the United States—and highlights major offenders. The report chides many serial violators of human rights norms—China, Syria, Iran, and Cuba, among others. Like those nations, North Korea's violations are highlighted in the report's introduction , which condemns it as “one of the world's most isolated and repressive regimes.” Similar language is reserved for China, where “human rights record deteriorated” and Cuba, which “continued to violate virtually all the rights of its citizens.” See also these related posts on Middle East Policy blog : - Middle East Human Rights 2007 - Freedom in 2006, Worst of the Worst - Freedom in the World 2006 - The 13 Internet Enemies 2006 Following is the main sections of the introduction of Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006 released by the US: Country Reports on