Day: April 11, 2013
I’m with April 6
I’m not a youth movement, but I confess to sympathy with this appeal from Egypt’s April 6. While I disagreed with them on voting for Morsi, who has announced that he is ending prosecutions of journalists, the time has come to do likewise for nonviolent activists (I’ve made only the most obvious editorial changes in this appeal):
An appeal to all youth movements and defenders of freedom, dignity, justice and human rights around the world.
April 6 Youth Movement, which began its activities and struggle against Mubarak in 2008 and sparked the revolution on January 25, 2011, after suffering with the military council after Mubarak the movement decided to support President Morsi in the presidential elections in order to get rid of the military rule in mid-2012, its members are getting tortured and oppressed again by the same old aggressive ways that we used to suffer from and revolt against, by the regime of President Morsi and his Ministry of Interior
President Morsi didn’t keep any of the promises that he made, so the movement starting opposing him as this is our role, and during one of our peaceful events in the street 3 of its leaders got arrested in late March 2013 during demonstrating in a peaceful manner against the violations of the Ministry of Interior, they were also tortured and treated with a very aggressive and violent way inside the prison, and their place of detention was hidden in contravention of the Constitution and the law and international norms, and when the lawyers knew the place of detention in Tora prison and tried to deliver clothes and food for them, they were beaten and tortured again inside the prison and transferred to another heavily guarded prison specially made for criminals and were put every one of them in solitary confinement in a very narrow, dark place underground in a filthy place full
of insects and they are also not allowed to talk with anyone inside the prison,
And prevents them contact and they are also given dirty food and put in a place not fit for a human life where there is no light or ventilation or clean water or sewage, in addition to ill-treatment by the prison administration and psychological torture throughout the day.
April 6 Youth Movement ‘s members are students and young intellectuals who came out to demand freedom, justice and dignity, and helped President Morsi in the presidential elections, hoping to end the military rule after the departure of Mubarak, so why are they treated with tougher treatment than criminals, and why does the same tragic situation in Egyptian prisons which is incompatible with the principle of dignity continue until now, and which came April 6 youth in the revolution of January 25, 2011 to demand it.
And how is the opposition of President Morsi getting tortured in this way after making the revolution which brought him out of the prisons of Mubarak and supporting him in the last presidential elections.
April 6 Youth Movement appeals to all those concerned with democratic issues around the world and all international organizations defending human rights and all the youth movements defending freedom and democracy, dignity and justice for solidarity with them and to stress on the release of the members of the movement who did not commit any offense and only objected in a peaceful manner against the way of the Interior with the citizens and killing of the demonstrators.
We demand your solidarity with April 6 movement in every way you can and by all means for the values that you are defending and which April 6 youth paid a lot of blood for, as many members of the movement paid their lives for the sake of these values and many others got injured.
The freedom, dignity and justice which April 6 youth came out in the revolution in 2011 to ask for, are the values defended by April 6 Youth which has shown solidarity with all youth movements around the world.
Be with us, in order to defend those values around the world.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Nothing is really dead until buried
Yesterday’s first-rate Middle East Institute/SAIS event on the Palestine/Israel peace process during the second Obama term offered two big takehomes:
- To be successful, an American president will have to treat making Middle East peace a top American national security priority;
- The Arab peace initiative, dead but not yet buried, should be revived.
These were the bottom lines of a discussion featuring the all-star cast of former Ambassador to Egypt and Israel. Dan Kurtzer, University of Maryland Professor Shibley Telhami and former Florida Congressman Robert Wexler. Geoffrey Aronson of the Foundation for Middle East Peace moderated. I introduced, but that was truly the least remarkable part of the event.
First-term President Obama did, Ambassdor Kurtzer thought, give the Middle East peace process priority, but without the needed strategy and policy follow-through. He is now giving Secretary Kerry an opportunity to make it work and wants to see progress. The key to success lies more in the parties’ relationships with the United States than with each other. Also important is the “Arab street,” whose weight is more strongly felt now than before the Arab awakenings.
Obama should have started with the progress that Palestinian President Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Olmert had made at the end of the second Bush Administration. Now the best place to start is with the Arab peace initiative, which needs to be deepened beyond the promise of Arab recognition once a deal is reached between Israel and the Palestinians. The Israelis need to be talking with the Arabs about climate change, economic development and other substantial issues beyond those traditionally part of the peace process.
Professor Telhami also underlined that the peace process has to be important for the United States, something of which President Carter but not President Clinton was convinced. Carter was therefore much more forceful than Clinton and put forward a detailed US proposal. 9/11 and the Iraq war shifted the priorities in the Bush Administration away from the Israel/Palestine, as war with Iran would do now. Even without that, Obama has to have his doubts. The Gulf Cooperation Council countries, especially Saudi Arabia, are much more important now than in the past, because the Arab awakenings have sidelined Egypt. The Arab peace initiative is the place to start.
Congressman Wexler emphasized the importance of political leadership and strength in determining a president’s effectiveness in an enterprise like the Middle East peace process. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Palestinian President Abbas have so far stiffed the President. If Obama can succeed at two of the three main issues he faces at the moment (immigration, guns and the Federal budget), he will be much stronger than in the past. There will be an opportunity, after the Iran nuclear issue is resolved, provided Obama is able to deliver on prevention rather than deterrence. He would then be able to prevail even if there is resistance to an Israel/Palestine deal in Congress. Jewish Americans will in any case not be an obstacle to a serious deal.
Audience members challenged the panel on two main points: whether the Arab peace initiative was in fact promising from an Israeli point of view, as it called for the right of return, and whether Israel can expect withdrawal from the West Bank to ensure peace, as that is not what happened with Gaza and Lebanon. Wexler responded that the Arab peace initiative clearly implied a negotiated solution to the right of return. Kurtzer reminded that Israeli withdrawals from Jordan and Egypt had led to peace, because they were negotiated and there was a good faith partner on the other end, whereas the unilateral withdrawals from Gaza and Lebanon left a vacuum.
Nothing, the panel suggested, is dead in the Middle East until it is buried. The peace process and the Arab peace initiative are not yet buried.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
There is still time
Yesterday was a big day for Serbian diplomacy. President Nikolic spent 40 minutes this morning at the UN denouncing the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Former Foreign Minister and now President of the General Assembly Jeremic claimed Serbia is committed to peace based on rule of law while continuing to disagree with the International Court of Justice on whether Kosovo’s declaration of independence breached international law (the result of a question Jeremic himself posed while foreign minister). The Prime Minister took himself off to Moscow, where Prime Minister Medvedev pledged to back whatever Serbia wants on Kosovo.
This trifecta tells us something about where Serbia is headed: it intends to maintain its claim to sovereignty over all of Kosovo, backed by Moscow. It will defy and criticize decisions of international tribunals whenever they do not accord with Belgrade’s own views. Its interest in EU membership is relative. It will not compromise even over the northwestern 11% of Kosovo, where fewer than half the Serbs in Kosovo live.
I imagine all of this defiance plays well for the domestic Serbian audience, where Nikolic, Jeremic and Dacic may all be campaigning sooner rather than later. Deputy Prime Minister Vucic, who increasingly is the real power in Serbia because of the popularity of his (once also Nikolic’s) “Progressive” Party, is widely thought to be contemplating early elections. Vucic’s anti-corruption campaign has garnered him a lot of support.
There is every reason to believe that nationalists will emerge from new elections even stronger than they are today. This is a Serbia pointed in the wrong direction: it is choosing a retrograde and quixotic claim to Kosovo over the EU and continuing to deny its role in the wars of the 1990s, or seeking to balance out that role by reference to the misdeeds of others. I share Belgrade’s unhappiness that more non-Serbs have not been convicted for crimes against Serbs, but that in no way relieves Serbia of responsibility for acts committed on its behalf.
American and European Union efforts to persuade Serbia to moderate its views on Kosovo have so far failed. Western policy has essentially been all carrot, no stick. Washington agreed to disagree on Kosovo while fully supporting Serbia’s efforts to gain access to EU benefits. The EU, until Angela Merkel’s tough stand against Serbia’s parallel institutions in northern Kosovo, was holding the door wide open to Serbia, hoping that its entry into the accession process would be sufficiently attractive to end its claim to sovereignty over Kosovo, or at least allow it to disband the Serbian institutions in the north.
Serbia prides itself on “non-alignment,” even after the end of the Cold War. It now risks condemning itself to a future aligned with Putin’s Russia, which has already tied Serbia tight with energy deals of dubious merit.
There is still time to choose the EU–Catherine Ashton won’t submit her report on efforts to normalize relations between Pristina and Belgrade until April 16. Vucic is burning up the telephone lines. My understanding is that Pristina and Belgrade delegations are expected to reappear in Brussels before then. Both capitals will be better off if Serbia finds a way to declare victory and reverse its stand on an agreement that will protect most Serbs in Kosovo better than if the negotiations fail.
RSS - Posts
