- December 1908: Palestinian villagers of Kafr Kama (near Tiberias) tried to reclaim land taken unfairly by the “Jewish Colonisation Association” (yes that was its actual name).

- 9 December 1917, British forces marched into Jerusalem to begin over three decades of repressive occupation that devastated the country and left an apartheid system in its wake.

- 14 December 1920: Third Congress of the Arab Executive Committee meets in Haifa and declares opposition to the Balfour Declaration and to Zionist plans for Palestine.

- December 1921: The Jewish Zionist Herbert Samuel appointed by the British as a “High Commissioner” of Palestine makes decrees allowing transfer of native Arab land ownership to the European Zionist movement.

- 7-17 December 1931: general Islamic conference held in Jerusalem attended by 145 key Islamic scholars and leaders from 22 countries.

- 13 December 1931: leaders of the previous organisation Al-Arabiya Al-Fatat and supporters of independence were mobilised and 50 of them met in the home of Awni Abd Hadi and drafted an Arab nationalist covenant. This document re-emphasised the regional Arab context for the struggle for Palestine as a joint effort against imperialism )this movement evolved later in 1933to form Hizb Al-Istiqlal).

- 9 December 1935: Palestinian strategy meetings and popular gatherings were held to commemorate the anniversary of the British occupation recognized as the beginning stirrings of the intifada/uprising of 1936-1939.

- December 1936: Michel Mitri, the most recognised Palestinian labour leader of the period, was assassinated by Zionist forces. He had dared to challenge the monopoly/hegemony of the Histadrut (Zionist labour federation) and always believed in popular resistance activities (non-violent).

- 2-4 December 1947: Three-day Palestinian general strike to reject the unfair conditions of a partition resolution at the UN which allocated 55% of the land to Jews who constituted less than a third of the population and were mostly new migrants (many illegal).

- 31 December 1947: Zionist forces massacred 60 villagers in Balad Al-Sheikh (Haifa district). Dozens of villages were “cleansed” in this December wave. Massacres were committed in Al-Tira, Haifa, Balad el-Sheikh, Yehiday, Khisas, and Qazaza. Between December 1st 1947 and May 14, 1948 (the date, the Zionists unilaterally declared their state), over half of the Palestinian refugee population was created. Thus, half of the 530 village and towns were ethnically cleansed while the area was still supposedly under British rule and protection (another British government treachery).

- 1 December 1948: The (British appointed) King of Jordan convened a conference in Jericho of unelected Palestinian elites who were to profit from agreeing to his annexation of what became known as the West Bank of Jordan. Later, the Jordanian monarch and his British Army commander turned the Negev and the Galilee over to Israel to allow the further expansion of the nascent state. The ancient name of Palestine was thus erased on both sides of what was to be called the Green Line (the armistice line)

- 2 December 1961: Arab students at the Hebrew University convened and established the Arab Jewish Committee ‘to end the military rule’ (the few remaining Palestinians inside the new state of Israel were under military rule from 1948-1966).

- December 1975: Israeli occupation forces raid Al-Qassaba area of Nablus killing nonviolent protesters.

- December 1986: Israeli soldiers chase students inside Birzeit university and used live ammunition, killing two and injuring twelve students.

- December 1987: demonstrations throughout Palestine and dozens of civilians (most under 18) were murdered.

- 13 December 1988: Arafat addressed the UNGA meeting in Geneva and stated that all parties should live in peace and security ‘including the state of Palestine, Israel, and other neighbours’.

- 15 December 1988: The Palestinian Centre for Rapprochement between People (PCR) issued an invitation to Internationals (including Israelis) to Beit Sahour to help break the siege and curfew. This was the beginnings of what evolved into the International Solidarity Movement.

- mid-December 1992: Israel took the unprecedented step of ordering the deportation to Lebanon of 416 Palestinians (an act contrary to international law). They stayed near the border in tents provided by the Red Cross and resisted the deportation.

I could go on but as can be seen December is as any other period in history brings up both sad memories of atrocities as well as memories of resilience and persistence and resistance of ordinary people. As we look to 2012, we hope that what is left of December will see more of the latter actions. There is a genuine popular resistance movement in the Arab world. But, as happened previously there are those who try to profit from other people’s work by posing only for the cameras or in conference rooms or worse yet engage in destroying the resistance while speaking about it in positive terms. There is a counter-revolutionary movement by forces allied with the US, with the apartheid regime (otherwise known as Israel), and with the cleptocracy (otherwise known as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia). There is an effort (which I think and hope will fail) to co-opt these revolutions. Some in the West (goaded on by Israeli lobbies) now speak openly of “allowing” Islamic forces to take over and in return insist that each new government ignores its people’s wishes and continue to support (or even increase) its support of Israel and allow “Free Market” businesses to continue to get rich people richer and poor people poorer. Libyan elites indeed were very open about this as are some opposition forces in Syria blessed by the US. The recent interview with a Mr. Ghalyoun of the Syrian opposition that appeared on the pages of the Wall Street Journal is an indication of such co-opted individuals. But we are hearing more rational voices from Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, Libya and elsewhere that is against dictatorships and for real democracy (which means isolating racist apartheid regimes). We must support all these people and demand real democracy.

Let there be no mistake about it, hundreds of millions of dollars are being mobilized and intelligence services and diplomatic and business “teams” are very busy shuttling back and forth to ensure this outcome. There is also a game of regional interests and some groups watching their own interests (Iran, Hezbollah, Turkey etc.). There are also dirty games of divide and conquer and false-flag operations. In all this mayhem, better awareness and education are critical. People who do not become aware and engage in serious work will go extinct (or at least continue to be impoverished) in the wild foggy jungle.

Palestinian Center for Human Rights: PLO’s Refusal to Pursue Accountability at UN Exhibits Disregard for Victims of Gaza Conflict.

From Occupation to “Occupy”: The Israelification of American Domestic Security” By Max Blumenthal:

Given the amount of training the NYPD and so many other police forces have received from Israel’s military-intelligence apparatus, and the profuse levels of gratitude American police chiefs have expressed to their Israeli mentors, it is worth asking how much Israeli instruction has influenced the way the police have attempted to suppress the Occupy movement, and how much it will inform police repression of future upsurges of street protest. But already, the Israelification of American law enforcement appears to have intensified police hostility towards the civilian population, blurring the lines between protesters, common criminals, and terrorists.

As an example of what Max is talking about, here is an example of a good peaceful action met with US police Brutality.

And [Israeli Apartheid] “Law Enforcement” Destroys Prayer House, Homes, School – Just Because They’re for Arabs.

Action for California people.

UN assembly passes 6 resolutions on Mideast conflict
“Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, and United States voted against each of the resolutions.” [All other >180 countries voted for them with few abstentions]

*Taken from the book “Popular Resistance in Palestine: A history of hope and empowerment” where you can find references/citation.

Mazin Qumsiyeh
A Bedouin in Cyberspace, a villager at home

This’ll be my first departure from Australia since repatriating nearly a decade ago. After spending 20 years based in Verbier, Switzerland, I’ve been rediscovering Australian culture, from Sydney to Yamba, Sandy Beach to Tamworth, to Newcastle, to Auburn in Sydney, before moving north again to Byron Bay. It seems settling down is not to be a quick and easy process for me.

I met comedian Akmal Saleh one night in a service station outside Tweed Heads. I was returning from the Gold Coast having watched the ‘crew screening’ of Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader, when who did I see filling up petrol in front of me? Akmal Saleh no less.

Being a fan, and knowing he’s a resident of the Byron Shire I thought I’d go say g’day and see if he’d do a comedy piece for my www.byronvibe.com website. With a flash of his brooding eyes and a shrug of his shoulders, his inimitable pursed grin replied “yeah, sure”.

A couple weeks later, we were wandering down main street in Byron, vox popping with Frank and some other randoms, having a laugh. (View clips here

After several months passed I get a call from Akmal asking if I’d be interested in going to Egypt to shoot a story. I had to think for all of a micro second before responding with an emphatic YES.

Of course the project had a low probability of coming off, as every project seems to at first in the film biz, so I didn’t get too excited as it was february and the trip was scheduled for August. There was a while to go and any number of factors could cancel the project, the instability of the new military government but one of note.

But we had good advice on that matter from an expert on Egyptian affairs who had recently returned from Egypt as well as another friend of Akmal’s who’d been a solicitor in Egypt for many years, and that seemed good enough for me.

Months rolled by. A couple of meetings at Lulu’s in Mullum. Phone calls from Akmal and I’m thinking, “this guy’s serious! Maybe it will happen!”

Sam has been a solicitor in Egypt for many years

Mitigating circumstances meant Akmal had to go in August or he couldn’t go at all… We tried to get a couple of production companies on board, but really time had run out and we had to make a decision: Go it alone or cancel the trip. But Akmal was keen, so with a month left he said “let’s go!”

New passport and visas had to be sorted. Camera equipment had to be sourced. The desire to shoot with Sony’s latest F3 rig had to give way to the reality of running gun in a place like the streets of Egypt and we decided on Sony’s less cumbersome and more discreet EX1, a compact yet high def solution from the friendly guys at Pro Cam in Brisbane.

With a week to go, packing down my gypsy abode should have been an easy process, but a spent tension pulley in the fan belt config meant I had to tow it to the Gold Coast at a cost which would have been better spent on the trip to Europe (yes, Europe, after Egypt, but that’s another story). The damn plastic spindle cost 90 bucks but the replacement of it cost $800 as they had to pull the front end off…

This setback could only be looked at one way. As a preparation to the many contigencies that I knew Egypt was going to throw at me once we were on the ground. Like a war of attrition I began to cross tasks off my list of things to do, before finally cramming tripod, audio gear, cameras and lenses, clothes, laptop and mobile-office kit into two backpacks and a ready-to-shoot bag. About a 50kg load all up.

Parking the ‘Hotel Benz’ at Karin’s (thanks Karin) I loaded my gear into Catie’s Van (Akmal’s wife and the production’s Line Producer) before we proceeded to the Gold Coast airport. The plan was for me to go two weeks prior to them to film the Abu El Haggag religious festival in Luxor which was advertised as being on the 17th and 18th July. This festival is a coming together of Muslims and Christians in a two day parade through the streets of Luxor around the ancient mosque of Abu El Haggag.

Abu El Haggag Mosque and Temple

Nothing like getting thrown in the deep end, on my own in a country I’ve never been to, don’t speak the language of (hoping my french will get me by if English doesn’t), with some expensive camera kit in tow, much to the consternation of family and friends who see the evening news regarding instability in the region…

But I was on my way to the airport, the one sure sign a project is on and the only time one allows oneself to get excited about the journey ahead, because today, I’m off to Egypt.

When Ismail Sidqi pasha refused that Egypt would get-in the war of 1948, he wasn’t a traitor to Egypt or loving Israel. All about it is that Ismail Sidqi was responsible for an economic renaissance in Egypt; he was the one to develop Alexandria and its beaches… The man feared that the war would destroy all the economic steps which Egypt took in the past years preceding the war.

But, Ismail Sidqi didn’t continue on his stance, El-Wafd party took a populist stance and went with the flow, supporting the war decision. Ismail Sidqi felt as a politician that he would lose people if he kept his stance, so he withdrew and supported the war, preferring popularity between the people over the interest of Egypt.

We are all subjected to Ismail Sidqi’s situation and we are required to to ask many questions, such as: Is this war in the interest of Egypt? Are we obliged to get involved into the war? Would we choose between the interest of Egypt and our desire to go with the flow along with the crowds to achieve personal political gains? This article discusses these barbed questions.

Firstly: Peace and Democracy
We all know that Egypt had a democratic parliamentary life till the coup d’état of 1952, and since this coup till this moment, we suffer from a totalitarian bloody militarist rule. But, we have to ask ourselves: Why did a coup happen? Does that have a relation with the case of peace and war?

The historical sequencing of events… Egypt entered a war in 1948 despite it wasn’t qualified to fight Israel from the side of development of weapons and efficiency of combatants, so this war changed two important elements:
1- Egypt’s commitment to the treaty of 1936 concerning to the evacuation of the British of Egypt. The treaty included the emergence of the British army after 20 years (in 1956) on a condition that the Egyptian army be advanced and able to defend Egypt. The palace deliberately intended to plunge Egypt to the war, from one hand for king Farouk’s desire for becoming a caliph of Muslims and on another hand, to destroy the Egyptian army, therefore to disable the evacuation process. That exactly what happened, after the defeat of the Egyptian army in the war, the weakness of the Egyptian army appeared to everyone, everything which was already built inside the army was destroyed, therefore, Egypt lagged what it pledged in the treaty of 1936, therefore, the evacuation won’t be on its time… That resulted dangerous political complications, most importantly the cancelation of the treaty of 1936, cutting-off of the diplomatic solution to solve the conflict, which paved the ground for a coup d’état solution to the evacuation issue. The war occurred on the way of Egypt independence.

2- The Egyptian soldiers were subjected to a huge defeat in the war of 1948, the toughest of it was the fall of many Egyptian soldiers under the siege of the Israeli army, the Egyptian soldiers became under the mercy of the Israelis who allowed the passage of food to them in order not to die of hunger. Then, in February 1949, Egypt was compelled to sign the armistice agreement with Israel in order to be able to get back its besieged soldiers. Those soldiers came back to Egypt in shame and dishonor (Gamal Abdel Nasser was personally of them), they went to a war and strongly lost it and were besieged, because of them Egypt was compelled to sign an armistice agreement with Israel to get them back.

In order for those soldiers to take away their shame of themselves, they created the lie of the corrupt weapons, despite the nonexistence of any proof on it. When the judiciary investigated in these rumors and proved their falsehood, they accused the regime of corruption. They didn’t have the courage to admit that the war was lost because of their failure. Starting from here, the claims to cleaning the army began, so the movement of the soldiers happened, which was at its beginning (as the statement of Muhammad Naguib) a movement of military soldiers aiming at cleaning the army, then the army would move back to its barracks. But, after the soldiers found themselves in control of everything, they didn’t abandon the authority, despite that the revolution court proved the nonexistence of any corrupt weapons in the war of 1948 which was the rumor that the coup d’état happened for.

We lost democracy and we suffered from oppression for 60 years, we were obliged to make the 25 January revolution, all of that because of a rumor or the soldiers shy of their defeat in the war of 1948. If we hadn’t entered the war, there wouldn’t had been the defeat and there would had been the rumor, there would had been the coup d’état and we would have been now celebrating 90 years of parliamentary democracy in Egypt. The relationship between peace and democracy is very strong. War opens the door for internal tyranny under the slogans “military secrets, the homeland interest, national security, no voice comes above the battle”. In wars, countries enforce “state of emergency/marshal law”, these are procedures to limit freedoms of citizens, not the enemies. In wars, armies inflate, opening the way for military coups (that’s why Ancient Rome banned the entrance for armies to the capital). Moreover, tyrants exploit wars to turn away the attention of their peoples from democratic reform, we all see how Arab tyrants exploit Israel to distract the Arab peoples from democratic reform issues and to distort the image of honorable opponents with silly charges of the type “Zionism, normalization, agent…”.

Secondly: Peace and Economic Growth
Regardless od the case of Ismail Sidqi which started my article with, Tawfik el-Hakim narrates, in his masterpiece “The Return of Consciousness”, information uncovering for us how wars destroyed the Egyptian economy.

- Tawfik el-Hakim narrates how the Egyptian army, under commands of Nasser, threw sacks of gold to the tribes of Yemen during the Yemen war, in order to sway them to the Egyptian side, which cause the depletion of the Egyptian gold stock… At the time when simple Egyptians were happy with Nasser who made them employees in the government, earning a few Egyptian pounds monthly!

- Tawfik also includes, the cost that Egypt paid during the 6 years between 1967 and 1973. He spread the numbers and said that what Egypt spent on the wars, if it had been spent on internal development, the share for each village would have been a million dollars (noting the difference between the value of the currency at that time; a million dollars in 1967 is equivalent to 5 million dollar by today’s standards). Imagine, what would Egypt look like now if we didn’t enter those wars, and spending this money on building schools, hospitals, streets and developing the civil society? What’s really silly is the governmental non-sense, in order to escape this question says that Israel was the one to start the war and occupied Sinai, when in reality, Nasser had announced the war in his speech on 15 July, 1967, before that he had used the right of land blockade against Israel which is of the rights of the the belligerent country… That if we ignored the historical novel which says that the decision to expel the international forces was taken by the Field Marshal “Abdel Hakim Amer” without Nasser knowledge, at the time when the Field Marshal the Army Chief of Staff, contesting Nasser in his authority!

Taking a look at the world around us… Look how America was hit from its war budgets and how America is solving the problem now by pulling its armies from Iraq and Afghanistan, also by dismantling some of the military bases in Europe.

See how the civil war weakened the Somali people and turned them into poor people despite the natural resources which Somalia has. See how the nuclear ambition of North Korea transformed the citizens into poor people, thousands of them die of hunger monthly. Look at the Axis countries in the second world war (Japan, Germany, Italy) and how they entered the war as strong countries and went out of it smashed under foreign occupation, and still are paying the price of this war till our day.

Peace is the strategic choice for all the people who want to live in luxury. On the other hand, the people who choose the wars would suffer poverty forever till they realize that wars drain their resources and the effort of their people.

Thirdly: Peace and Life of Humans
Does the one who takes the decision of war realize that he is making a decision of execution tens of thousands of humans, including who are going to have permanent disabilities in the war? The life of the one who takes the decision of the war won’t be subjected to danger, he would keep sitting in his air-conditioned office in the capital, while the youth and the patriots from both side are paying their souls because of the failure of the political leadership in reaching a diplomatic peaceful solution.

I can’t believe any official numbers regarding the Egyptian victims in our wars with Israel. Some militarists estimated the victims of Egypt in the war of 1973 as million martyrs! Other than the injured, the lost and the prisoners of war. I can say that when Israel aired the documentary “Spirit of Shaked” about executing Egyptian prisoners of war, Egyptians asked themselves if there were still Egyptian prisoners of war in Israel, but none of the officials knew the answer of the question.

What is the reason to make a country enters a war to lose its youth and the rest lose their limbs, imagine the population percentage between both genders (as what happened in Germany after the second world war, the percentage was one man for every 5 women)! Why all that when there are alternative solutions to solve conflicts?
I know that in the last decades, suicidal orientations have appeared under the naming “martyrdom.. industry of death, asceticism in life, challenging death…), but here I speak to reasonable who seek the interest of their homeland and not committing suicide, who search for life not death.

The goal of any conflict is to solve the conflict, not to exterminate the other. The goal of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is to achieve the full Palestinian right, not exterminating the Israelis. If you were looking for the Palestinians’ interests, then the solution is in peaceful negotiation, not in entering war which both sides die in, the Samson style (on me and my enemies)? But, if you were seeking suicide, please, commit suicide quietly without killing millions of innocents with you.

Epilogue
When I was choosing the title of the article, I wanted to title it “Peace to Egypt, not Israel”, but I preferred it to be “Peace to Egypt Before it is to Israel”… Because, peace would benefit everyone, Egypt, Israel, Palestine, even Iran and Turkey. Peace will benefit the whole world. Our role as Egyptians is to think sanely of the interest of our homeland, the interest of our revolution, the project of democratic transformation, our ambition for economic growth and our fear on lives of our brothers, our children and friends.
The peoples have to choose and each reasonable society have their mind and know their own salvation.

Maikel Nabil Sanad
El-Marg prison – 2 ع [‘ayn]
2011/8/7

(A picture of the “sign of peace”)

Over 6 decades, Egyptians tried many strategies for opposition, starting from opposition from within the ruling party (and it’s the weakest strategy), to the militant opposition (and it’s the most violent strategy) – all these attempts failed. Till Egyptians discovered a new strategy, “the peacefulness” and the Egyptian revolution came out chanting “peaceful… peaceful”, and the peacefulness succeeded in achieving what the Kalashnikov couldn’t.
6 weeks as well is approximately the period of the Arab-Israeli conflict… For 64 years, Arabs tried many strategies dealing with Israel (starting from being agents to terrorism), and also all the attempts failed… So, why don’t we start adopting a peaceful strategy dealing with the state of Israel to reach full rights to all the peoples of the region? That research paper is an attempt of me to explain how peaceful means can end that conflict completely, thus all the peoples of the region rest and their suffering ends.

However, dear reader I have to warn you, if what leads you to deal with that case is the motivation of revenge and the desire to get-rid of Jews then that research isn’t directed towards you, so don’t waste your time reading it. This research is directed toward who wish to end the conflict by fair way giving all parties their legitimate rights.

The first scene: Security Council decision – November 1947
The first scene which I’m going to concentrate on between numerous historical scenes I’m going to present. It’s the events which followed the decision of Security Council to divide Palestine in November 1947… What were the reactions on the decision? Were these reactions correct or wrong?
After 6 days of issuing Security Council decision, the Arab League met and took a decision to prevent Security Council decision by force (by weapons)… Arabs ignored the peaceful and the diplomatic ways, they didn’t resort to a dialog and didn’t discuss Security Council in its decision. All they did was each one of them went to bring his weapon and chant “death to Jews”.

At the time when Arabs were drunk with the fever of blood-shedding Jews, Israelis were making a world-wide diplomatic campaign to convince the whole world to support the born state of Israel. The United States of America felt that Security Council decision will ignite a war in the region, so it provided a recommendation that to Security Council demanding canceling the partition plan. As usual, Arabs were busy preparing violence, they didn’t care for that American step, and Israelis didn’t go back to their homeland until they convinced the Americans to take back their recommendation from Security Council.

Here, a question arises: What if Arabs thought about peaceful means, and traveled as well to to convince the Americans with their point of view, also the rest of Security Council members? What if America didn’t take back its recommendation about canceling the partition plan? Arabs could have canceled the Security Council decision, therefore obstructing the establishment of the state of Israel from the first place, but unfortunately they were busy with violence, weapons and the desire to kill, so they lost everything.

The second scene: declaring the state of Israel – 15 May 1948
Days passed after the decision of Security Council and it wasn’t canceled. Based on the decision, Israel declared its independence as soon as the British mandate for Palestine ended. So, why didn’t also the Palestinians declared their state at that time, backed by the legitimacy of Security Council decision, and it’s the decision in which Israel adheres to strongly because it’s the decision which gave it legitimate existence? The answer simply is that Palestinians and Arabs were busy with war and blood, and they weren’t interested in peaceful ways, of the type of holding a parliament and heading to the United Nations to declare a Palestinian state.
Once more, Palestinians wasted a golden chance because of being busy with violence.

The third scene: Moshe Sharet initiative – 1953
After declaring independence, David Ben-Gurion headed the Israeli government, who was a Zionist leader adopting radical stances firm against Israel. The chance for achieving peace at his era was very weak. In the year 1953 the Israeli Knesset had its second Prime Minister for Israel who was Moshe Sharet, who was contrary to Ben-Gurion, believing in peace and giving Arabs their rights. Moshe Sharet demanded from the Israeli Knesset to delegate him in making peace talks with Arabs. The Knesset agreed to delegate Moshe Sharet in negotiating on anything and everything (including the right of Palestinian refugees to return inside the Israeli lands).
Moshe Sharet went to all Arab leaders asking for dialog, all of them refused and insisted to settle the conflict by war and violence. Gamal Abdel Nasser agreed on the dialog on the condition of secrecy, because Gamal Abdel Nasser didn’t have the courage to face his people that he was making peaceful negotiations with Israel.
Thus, Moshe Sharet fell in 1954 because of Moshe Sharet failure to convince Arabs of peaceful mechanisms to settle the conflict. David Ben-Gurion became once again to be Prime Minister closing many doors for a peaceful solution to the conflict.

Why Arabs don’t ask themselves: What if they accepted Moshe Sharet initiative? What if these negotiations succeeded and the Palestinian state was established at then, and the refugees came back home? Once again, Arabs lose because of their adherence to violent mechanisms and their objection to peaceful mechanisms.

The fourth scene: the assassination of king Abdallah – 1951
After the Arab defeat in in 1948 war and the truce agreement with Israel in Rhodes – February 1949, and because of not declaring a Palestinian state, Gaza became under the Egyptian administration while the West Bank under the Jordanian administration.

King Abdallah Ben Al-Sharif Hussein, king of Jordan, realized the importance of reaching a peaceful solution to the conflict after the failure of the military attempt. He went to visit Jerusalem along with his peaceful efforts, but the Palestinian terror was waiting for him. He was assassinated inside Aqsa mosque, so that the first peaceful Arab effort be assassinated towards Israel.

After 60 years of assassinating king Abdallah, we ask ourselves: did Abdallah’s benefited Palestinians? Of course not, because Jordan was dragged to a conflict with Israel which didn’t end except after the agreement of Wadi Arabah in 1994, while the West Bank was subject to Israeli occupation and still to that day suffering of a spread of the Israeli army and Israeli settlements in. If king Abdallah hadn’t been assassinated, the West Bank would have now been without settlements and Jordan wouldn’t have lost in its economy and its youth in a conflict for 40 years with Israel. Once again, Arabs lose because of their inclination toward violence and their objection to the peaceful means.

The fifth scene: the Egyptian peace treaty – 1979
In the year 1977, Sadat realized the importance of what king Abdallah was doing in the year 1951, so he decided to start an Arab peace initiative. He visited Jerusalem in November, 1977 and afterward, immediately the Egyptian-Israeli peace talks started. All the Arab parties in the conflict were invited to to join the peace talk, but the Arabs found it hard to make a peaceful work. They launched the “The Three No’s of Khartoum”, objecting any peaceful solution to the conflict, adhering to militarist settlement.

Today, after 32 years of signing the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, we ask ourselves: what if Arabs accepted the peaceful negotiations in Sadat era? What would the Arabs have lost if they negotiated at that time without a result? Was what Jordan take in 1994 more than what it would have taken if it joined Sadad initiative in 1979? Was what the Palestinians take in Oslo, 1993, more than what would they have taken in 1979?
Once again, Arabs waste the chance because of their adherence to the armed solutions not the peaceful solutions.

The sixth scene: Camp David 2 – year 2000
In the year 2000, many positive circumstances gathered. President Bill Clinton was at the end of his presidency and wanted to end the conflict in the Middle East before he leaves office. At the same timing, Israel was lead Ehud Barak of the Labor Party of Israel – Labor Party is a leftist political party known by its support to peace process. Israel was on the eve of parliamentary elections, so Barak needed a success facilitating obtaining many seats in the next Knesset.
The talks had actually started at Camp David, Yasser Arafat, Ehud Barak, Bill Clinton, and who views what Israel offered at that time, would realize that Israel offered an offer in which Palestinians won’t obtain a similar offer forever. A state on the borders of 1967, Eastern Jerusalem the capital city, dismantling of settlements and the return of a percentage of refugees. Palestinians will go after two month from now (in September 2011) to the United Nations too declare a Palestinian state and they know well that they won’t obtain what Israel offered them in Camp David 2.

Yasser Arafat signature was only required and the United States guaranteed the agreement, in other words America would compel Israel to implement. However, Mubarak was annoyed of his absense in the talks, so as, he realized that it is of his interest that the conflict continues, so the relationship between Yasser Arafat and the Egyptian Intelligence was exploited, and he was pressured into objecting to sign the treaty. Emotionally provoking vocal phrases were raised, of the type: resistance, occupation, martyrs, uprising, treason, agents, Zionists. Arafat apologized and didn’t sign the treaty saying to Bill Clinton, “if I signed the treaty, you’ll walk in my funeral soon”.

What happened later on? George Bush, the son, came to White House, he wasn’t a man of peace of any kind. In the Israeli elections, Israelis felt that what Labor Party says is useless with Arabs, so Labor Party together with Meretz lost most of their seat and the Israeli right rose to authority, represented by Likud of the militarist background, allying itself with religious political parties of type of “Shas” and “The Jewish Home”. It objected to Camp David 2 and almost destroyed Labor Party, to the extent it’s now a very weak political party in Israel which isn’t influential in political life. Ehud Barak who used to be a hero of peace, didn’t forget at all the Arabs destroyed his strength and transformed him from a strong leader to a chief of a weak political party, so, Barak became an impeder to peace more than a supporter to it.

So, what do Arabs benefit of objecting Camp David 2? Did the Palestinian uprisings give the Palestinians 1% of what would have Camp David 2 give them? What would Arabs do now after the partners of peace in Israel have been destroyed and the governance there was took-over by fanatics and religiously-biased? Do Arabs imagine that they would get more than what was offered to them? What would happen now to any peace agreement after half of what Israel offered in 2000 became unacceptable and not possible to be offered in 2011? What did the Palestinians benefit of being the “sons of stones”? Wouldn’t be better for them to be the “sons of peace”?

Seventh scene: Arab Spring – 2011
When the Tunisian revolution started in December 2010, everyone looked at it as an exceptional case specific to Tunisia, and everyone dealt with the approach of “Egypt isn’t Tunisia” and “Libya isn’t Tunisia”. But, when the revolution succeeded in Egypt in overthrowing Mubarak and when the revolutions in Libya, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain erupted, everyone realized that the Arabic-speaking peoples knew the strength of the peaceful revolutions.

The Israeli right stood confused in front of a fateful question: “what if the Palestinians started a peaceful revolution”? Israel was accustomed to that the Palestinian resistance is militant, because using violence against Israel allows it to use its army in the framework of self-defense and no one would blame Israel when it chases child-kidnappers or killers of civilians. But, if the Palestinians started a peaceful revolution, Israel won’t be able to use its army, so what would it do? No one in Israel (and specifically the Israeli right) found an answer on that question, and the fear remained to them of a Tunisian revolution.
But, as one of Israel leaders said that “Israel’s success doesn’t depend on its smartness, but on the stupidity of its enemies”. The Palestinians wasted the chance in the second uprising in 15 May 2011, contrary to the rest of the Arab peoples, the Palestinians didn’t look for a Palestinian Tahrir square to protest in peacefully. Palestinians didn’t realize that the peacefulness has no relation with penetrating the borders, infringement on the territorial waters of Israel and chanting racist words. A peaceful sit-in disseminating racist ideas is exactly as the sit-in of Mostafa Mahmoud square, where peaceful protestors chanting shit thought, and of course that won’t lead to a result. The chance is still available for Palestinians to adopt the peaceful method of Tahrir before it’s too late.

(A picture of the biggest demonstrations in the history of Israel, Tel Aviv, 6 August 2011)

Peaceful Strategies toward Israel
- Why won’t we start trying peaceful strategies with Israelis and see if it would succeed as the peaceful Egyptian revolution succeeded? We tried violence for 6 centuries, so why don’t we try the peacefulness for 6 months?

- Before the eruption of the Egyptian revolution, the Egyptian demonstrators were at the beginning of their demonstration giving flowers to police officers and tell them “we’re not demonstrating against you,but against the regime”… So, why don’t we send flowers to Israelis and tell them “we are not antagonize you as individuals, but we are against your policies toward us and Palestine”?

- Also, before the Egyptian revolution, one of the opposition groups published on the internet a list with telephone numbers of Egyptian police officers and we started a campaign of calling those officers, trying to convince them to stop assaulting demonstrators… That campaign succeeded in attracting numerous police and army officers and ex-officers and their families, and they participated in our revolution.

So, why don’t we start in the same thing with Israelis? Why don’t we start communicating with ordinary Israeli individuals and tell them that the Mossad and the Israel Defense Forces actions are unacceptable, inhumane and obstruct peace in the region? Why don’t we convince try to them with the justice of our cause, if we really believe-in its just.

What if we each Egyptian person started adding two Israelis on his friends list on Facebook? If there were million Egyptians, each one of them can only affect two Israeli citizens, that means that we are affecting 2 million Israeli citizens (or a quarter of Israel census)… So, what if we put in consideration that Egypt has approximately 10 million Facebook users, and that each on of them has the ability to add 5000 friends to his friends list. The soft force is much stronger than any other violence you imagine.

It’s of my interest, of your the interest and the whole world’s interest that the conflict ends in Middle Easy, therefor I wish that we start a true beginning in Arab peaceful attempts for the sake of putting an end to the conflict and blood-shedding, and to establish a fair warm peace built on coexistence between the peoples of the region.

Maikel Nabil Sanad
El-Marg general prison
2 ع [‘ayn]
2011/7/29

Lieutenant General Saad Eddin el-Shazly, Chief of Staff of the Egyptian Armed Forces

Lieutenant General Saad Eddin el-Shazly, born on the 1st of April 1922, was an Egyptian military general. He was Egypt’s Chief of Staff of the Egyptian Armed Forces during the October War, born in the city of Basyoun in the Gharbiya Governorate, to a landed family from Shobratana in the Nile delta. His grandfather fought in the Khedive Ismail Pasha’s campaign in Sudan, where he had died. His uncle,  ِAbdel Salam El -Shazly Pasha, was a Member of Parliament, Minister of Religious Affairs, the founder and first Minister of the Social Affairs Ministr and the Governor of el-Beheira and Cairo, and also had been an outspoken critic of King Faourk’s policies. Members of the Shazly family had also participated in the Egyptian Revolution of 1919 against the British occupation of Egypt.

He founded and became the commander of the first Paratroops Battalion in Egypt from the period of 1954 to 1959. He was also the commander of the United Arab Forces in UN mission to Congo from 1960 to 1961, after which he became a military attaché in London from 1961 to 1963. He was later stationed as the commander of the Infantry Forces from 1965 till 1966.

El-Shazly had distinguished himself in the Six Day War in 1967 his unit being the last unit to exit Sinai through the Khatmiya pass after maneuvering throughout Sinai with communications cut between him and the Egyptian High Command, he had finally managed to get the unit to cross back through the Suez Canal into Ismailia. After that, he was appointed as the commander of both the Egyptian Special Forces and Paratroopers from the period of 1967 to 1969, where his unit was stationed at the city of Port Fouad and had carried out most of the sabotage, raids, ambushes and missions of the Attrition War, Port Fouad was the only part of Sinai to have remained under Egyptian control. El-Shazly then assumed command of the Red Sea sector from 1970 to 1971. The Red Sea sector was almost 200,000 square kilometers, roughly a fifth of Egypt’s total size and he had the task of defending it against enemy airborne commando operations, which were conducted mostly at night.

As the Egyptian Chief of Staff during the October War, Saad was the mastermind behind Operation Badr, that had eventually led to the breaching of the Bar Lev line on the 6th of October in 1973, allowing Egyptian control over the Suez Canal and the advancement of the Egyptian troops for 10 miles further into Sinai under the umbrella of the Egyptian air defense front, which prevented any confrontation between the Egyptian ground troops and te Israeli air force, which had been superior at that time. It was that victory that had been celebrated by Egyptians and glorified for many years by the Egyptians and the Arabs as well.

Then it happened, during the early days of the war, the Syrian front was under heavy pressure from the IDF, and so Syrian President Hafez al-Assad made an explicit request to Egyptian President Anwar Sadat to advance the Egyptian forces deep into Sinai as an attempt to release the pressure on the Syrian side. El-Shazly said it was a wrong decision as it would not release the pressure on the Syrian side and would subject the Egyptian forces to danger. However, when Anwar El Sadat against the advice of his military leadership, ordered his ill-fated attack deep into Sinai, away from under the air defense umbrella, which culminated in the penetration by Israeli forces through Egyptian lines after heavy losses suffered at the Egyptian front, at Devresoir into Egyptian territory and the encirclement of the Third Army. the Kilometer 101 Negotiations which set in motion, one concession after the other done by Egypt until the Camp David Treaty was put in place. In the middle of all this, Sadat had relieved el-Shazly from his post as Chief of Staff after he had sent him to the front lines to evaluate the situation and falsely stated that el-Shazly had commanded the withdrawal of all the Egyptian forces from Sinai although he had only suggested the withdrawal of four armored brigades, a fact that was also seconded for by Field Marshal el-Gamasy, Commander-in-Chief of the Egyptian Armed Forces who was also appointed by Anwar Sadat the head of the group that participated in the disengagement talks on October 28, at “Kilometer 101″.

El-Shazly was removed from military service by President Anwar Sadat and appointed Ambassador to Britain and later Ambassador to Portugal. In 1978 General Shazly sharply criticized the Camp David agreement and publicly opposed it. As a result, he was dismissed from his post and forced into exile in Algeria. There he wrote this book ‘The Octobar War’, his account of the war, for which he was tried by a military tribunal in absentia and without legal representation. He was sentenced to three years in military prison. The charges were writing this book without first getting permission from the Egyptian Ministry of Defense, a charge he admitted to in the press. A second charge of allegedly revealing military secrets in his book, charges which he had denied. In 1992 he returned to Egypt where he was arrested and served out his prison sentence, little was heard from him after that until his death at the age of 88 years old on the 10th of February in 2011. His daughter Shahdan was interviewed by al-Masry al-Youm about her father and when she was asked what her father though about #Jan25, he replied saying “Nahaboona” (they stole from us).

Staff Sergeant Muhammad Abdul-Atty, 122nd Field Artillery Brigade of the Egyptian Armed Forces

Staff Sergeant Muhammad Abdul-Atty, born on December 15th 1950 in the small town of Sheeba Qash in the Sharqiyya Governorate, went to University in 1961 and later on graduated as an Agricultural Engineer to work in Minya el-Qamh. He later joined the Egyptian Armed Forces in 1969. He had joined the Special Forces, then he was transferred to the Artillery Unit, where he would spend time there specializing in anti-tank missiles.

Demonstrating amazing skill with the use of ‘Fahd’ anti-tank missiles, particularly in front of Major General Muhammad Saeed el-Mahi, Commander of the Artillery Corps. He was promoted to a First Sergeant on April 6th in 1971 by the Chief of Staff.

When the attack began on October 6th, he was one of the first Egyptians to cross the Bar Lev line in complete amazement and cross into Sinai, they managed, being a part of the 122nd Field Artillery Brigade and they managed to cross all the way to Moses’ Wells on the first day of battle. They managed to hold their position for the second day despite aerial attacks from the Israeli Air Force.

On the 8th of October, they engaged with the Israeli 190th Armored Bridgade that was led by Colonel Assaf Yagouri . In just a half hour, Abdul-Atty had managed to destroy 13 tanks and his partner Bayoumi destroyed 7 tanks, which resulted in the retreat of the Israeli forces, Colonel Assaf Yagouri was captured later by Brigadier General Hassan Sa’ada, commander of the 2nd Infantry Division (currently the 7th Mechanized Division). On the next day, another Israeli armored force was coming in, composed of APCs, jeeps and tanks, Abdul-Atty thinking that the missile would be a waste on the jeep, aimed for the APC first, hitting the target and blowing it up. The Israeli tanks attempted to move out-of-the-way and so he aimed for them one after the other, destroying four more tanks that day making the total number of tanks that he destroyed 17 tanks.

On the 10th of October, help was called from the 34th Mechanized Battalion that was under attack by 3 Israeli tanks. Abdul-Atty being always prepared with anti-tank missiles next to him, managed to destroy all 3 tanks on that day. He then later on destroyed one tank on the 15th of October and on the 18th of October, he destroyed 2 tanks and 1 APC. In total, Muhammad Abdul-Atty had single-handedly destroyed 23 tanks and 3 APCs during the war, earning the title of the ’Tank Destroyer’.

After the war, he was given the Sinai Star by Anwar Sadat, the highest medal of honor in Egypt and the Medal of Courage by Muammar Gaddafi, the highest medal of honor in Libya. Released from military service in 1974, he was later honored by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1993 and went to Mecca to visit the Kaaba in the host of the Saudi King, Abdullah bin Abdul-Aziz al-Saud.

Another Egyptian hero who vanished from the history books we studied at school. He suffered from Hepatitis C later on in his life and could not manage the finances to provide proper treatment for himself neither it was provided for him by the government, and he ended up dying later on the 9th of December in 2001 and forgotten by many. Egyptian poet Abdul Rahman al-Abanody, while sick in Paris wrote a last poem dedicated to Muhammad Abdul-Atty called ‘Ism Mashtoob‘ or Struck-out Name.

Mahmoud Nur Eddin, Founder & Commander of the Organized Movement 'Egypt's Revolution'

Mahmoud Nur Eddin, born in Alexandria on the 26th of January in 1940. A former military intelligence officer and diplomat, after graduating from high school he traveled to London to work in the Egyptian Embassy’s commercial office. He studied in the University of London at the mean time and graduated with an Economics major, after which he was appointed at the intelligence office in the Egyptian Embassy.

There he was assigned to monitor Zionist activities in London as Egypt prepared to go to war with Israel. A job that he had done quite well. He was the first to save the Embassy by detecting a detonating package that was sent there. He kept serving as an intelligence officer until Anwar Sadat had visited Jerusalem in 1977. It was a major shock to Mahmoud, one that led him to resign from his post as an intelligence officer and the founding of a magazine that was strongly critical of Sadat’s policies called ‘July 23rd’.

During his life in London, several attempts were made on his life, with the burning of his house in London, from which he survived and also a car chase, that led to him having an accident but still surviving.

Contributors to July 23rd were Mahmoud al-Saadani, Fahmy Hussein and caricature artist Salah el-Laithy, but the magazine after a year was no longer issued due to financial reasons, being funded by Mahmoud himself.

Mahmoud returned to Egypt in 1983 and there he came up with the idea to create an armed resistance against the Israeli presence in Egypt. His main target would be Mossad agents who work in Egypt under a diplomatic cover and assassinate them. By 1984 the armed movement was founded and it was called ‘Egypt’s Revolution’, one of its 20 members being Khaled Abdel Nasser, one of Nasser’s sons, who was in exile in Yugoslavia and was believed to be financing the group. Mahmoud refused entirely the targeting of any Egyptian saying that bullets were better off being shot at Zionists.

On the 5th of June in 1985, their first operation was carried where Zvi Kadar, Security officer of the Israeli Embassy in Cairo was shot and wounded in his hand during the attack. Their second operation was carried out on August 20 in 1985 where an employee of the Israeli Embassy, Albert Atraghji, was shot and killed while driving in his car. His wife and an embassy secretary were wounde. Mahmoud would later describe Albert as one who took joy in “gouging out Egyptian prisoners’ eyes”. Their third operation was done on March 19th, 1986 where Etti Tal-or, wife of an employee in the Israeli Embassy in Cairo, was killed and three embassy employees were injured in an attack on their car, near the Israel pavilion at the Cairo Trade Fair as an objection to the Israeli participation in the trade fair. In May 1987, they attacked and wounded two American Embassy staff members, Dennis Williams and John Hucke.

This resulted in the movement being pursued by the Israeli Mossad, the CIA and Egyptian intelligence all at the same time, they were deemed terrorists. Eventually a betrayal by his own brother Ahmad Essam, who went to the American Embassy and offered them information in return for the American citizenship and money. Mahmoud and the entire movement were captured and his brother Ahmad Essam, wasn’t given anything and was handed by the American Embassy along with the rest of the movement to the Egyptian authorities.

In addition to two relatives of Gamal Abdul Nasser, his son Khaled and cousin Gamal Shawki Abdul Nasser, 18 were charged in court. Mahmoud stated in trial that he was targeting members of the CIA and Israeli Mossad that worked in Egypt under the diplomatic cover of their embassies. Khaled and 4 other others were cleared by court. However, Mahmoud Nur Eddin was sentenced to 25 years in prison, after which he was taken to Tora prison where he was systematically tortured there along with others in the movement.

Mahmoud had later suffered from illness and requested treatment abroad, but was denied that request, although his condition was not serious as according to Sheikh Hamid Ibrahim, a friend of his and who went to the same prison, he only suffered some pain in his cervical vertebrae. Mahmoud died on September 16th in 1998 after 11 years in prison, the coroner’s report stated that he was infected by a ‘bacterium’ in his brain that caused a sudden high fever leading to his death, a report which accuracy and truth is questioned till this day.

Private Ayman Hassan of the Egyptian Armed Forces

Private Ayman Hassan, otherwise known as the ‘Egyptian Rambo’, born on November 18th in 1967 in the city of Zagazig in el-Sharqiyya. While stationed near the borders, he single-handedly planned and executed the attack at al-Naqb in which 21 Israeli officers and soldiers were killed, with another 20 injured after he laid assault on two Israeli buses and a jeep.

Returning to the Egyptian borders, he turned himself in and fully confessed to his actions to his commanding officer. He was apprehended as such and subjected to military tribunal on April 6th in 1991 where he was sentenced to 12 years on charges of deliberate manslaughter of Israeli military personnel and the destruction of several Israeli vehicles. Ayman denied taking orders from any superior officers or being a part of any movement, stating that he and he alone planned and executed his operation

When asked on his motives. He responded saying that this was his response to the First Aqsa Massacre, an event that took place at 10:30 am on Monday October 8th in 1990 before Zuhr prayer during the third year of the First Intifada. Where after a decision by the Temple Mount Faithful to lay a cornerstone at the site. Clashes began that resulted in the death of over twenty and the injury of more than 150 Palestinians. An event that had come to be known later as ‘Black Monday’. Also after Israeli soldiers had desecrated the Egyptian flag near the Egyptian-Israeli borders.

Before the incident, he had told said how he held a deep grudge towards Israeli for the assassination of the Egyptian scientist and Army Colonel Saeed el-Sayyid Bedair, a specialist in microwave communications in satellites and spy satellites, who was his neighbor in Zagazig in his apartment in Alexandria and claiming he had committed suicide, even though he was preparing to travel and work in the University of Indonesia. He had also known about the story of Sulaiman Khater (which you will get to know in a bit) and called him a hero.

Although he stated that he wasn’t ill-treated during his stay in Abu-Zaabal prison. After he was released, he could not work because of his ‘bad military record’ and ‘criminal record’, after refusing a job of being a garbage man. He took on the job of being a plumber to this day in order to be able to provide is family. As usual, Ayman was forgotten by the government and was not even deemed a hero for his actions. He was yet another victim of the Camp David treaty with Israel.

Conscript Sulaiman Khater of the Egyptian Central Security Forces

Conscript Sulaiman Khater, born in the small town of Akyad in el-Sharqiyya. Sulaiman got to witness a horrifying event as a child. For him and his friend had witnessed the massacre of Bahr al-Baqar school on April 8th in 1970, where Israeli planes bombed down the school and killed 30 children, he was only 9 years old back then and took part in extracting the children’s bodies from beneath the rubble.

He had joined the military service and was situated as a conscript with the Central Security Forces at Ras Barqa at the Egyptian-Israeli borders. During the service, he was known to keep his weapon in good condition, also memorizing its serial number. He was also able to re-assemble and arm his weapon at a record-breaking time.

While stationed at the borders, he encountered a group of Israelis in swimsuits climbing over the hill on which he was stationed attempting to cross the border. He yelled in English saying ‘Stop! No passing’ expecting them to turn around, but they passed the checkpoint and kept walking.

Following protocal, Sulaiman fired warning shots in the air thinking that would stop them but it did not. As they walked their way towards a shack that contained weapons and communications equipment. Sulaiman found himself loading his gun, he and no time he said to report to his superior officer as the Israelis kept spitting on him and on the Egyptian flag and insulting both of them. Sulaiman aimed his rifle at them thinking it would scare them, but one of them responded by drawing his gun and firing at Sulaiman at which point he started firing back. On that night on October 5th in 1985, he shot and killed 7 Israelis and injured others. Among the Israelis was the Head of the Israeli Military Court and an Army officer with the rank of Major. Sulaiman had noticed a little girl running scared after the incident, so he caught her, carried her and handed her to one of his friends – after they gathered at the scene – asking him to get her back to Israeli territory.

After that he requested the presence of his commanding officer, then turned himself in along with his weapon.

At the military prosecution and trial, Sulaiman stated that they had crossed the borders without permits and had refused to respond to the warning shots in the air. He said that anybody who passes through that area has to know the password, even if an Egyptian officer didn’t know the password, the weapon would have to be raised in his face and he would have to be laid down on the floor and asked why he is here.

Sulaiman also said that he was only doing his job, which was guarding that hill, he said no man should be on that hill whether he was a foreigner or an Egyptian. He also refered to a previous incident in which an Israeli woman was able to seduce an Egyptian conscript, drug him to sleep then steal his walkie-talkie along with its codes, after he invited her to the headquarters of the border unit.

When asked why he memorized the serial number of his weapon, Sulaiman replied ‘Because I love it just like the word Egypt’.

In trial, he was famously quoted for saying;

I do not fear Death nor does it scare me, but I fear that the verdict that maybe issued against me would have a bad effect on my friends in the army, scaring them and killing their patriotism

He was sentenced to 25 years in military prison, after the verdict was read. Sulaiman yelled that this verdict is against Egypt, because he was an Egyptian soldier who fulfilled his duty. Turning to his own guards he said;

Go guard the Land of Sinai, Sulaiman does not need guards

On January 7th in 1986. Sulaiman Khater was announced dead and was reported to have been found dead in his cell. The government said that he had committed suicide but it was denied by his family, who had requested a new coroner’s report explaining the cause of death, a request which was denied raising the issue of whether Sulaiman was assassinated in his cell or not. Egyptian students and political activists rose in mass protests condemning the government and accusing it of killing Sulaiman to appease Israel, a sentiment that was shared by Sulaiman’s mother.

Now in front of his house, a mosaic factory stands with the label ‘Sulaiman Khater’s Mosaic Factory’, also the Iranian government named a street after him in Tehran in commemoration to his actions and his heroism.

Such heroes have been neglected by the government and forgotten by many people for too long. But the truth is coming out and with the current protests at the Israeli Embassy and the initiative taken by the #Jan25 youth to abolish the Camp David treaty and expose the crimes of the past regime in concealing the facts about these people along with many others who were killed at the borders by Israeli gunfire. Somebody has to answer for this, and sooner or later, these people will be held accounted for.

As a result of World War two in late August 1941, British troops occupied southern part of Iran, with the Soviets controlling the north. The aim of the occupation was to dislodge Shah of Iran who the Allies forces suspected would turn his pro-German sympathy into Military Corporation. There was no Iranian government at that time. In the absence of a Central government, the Soviets tried to attach northwestern of Iran to the Soviet Union. City of Mahabad which mostly inhabited by Kurds wasn’t occupied by any of the forces that led to vacuum of power. Soviet promoted nationalism amongst Kurds. These factors made Kurds think about self-governing for Kurds within the Iranian state. In 1942, as a result of vacuum of power, a committee supported by tribal leaders took control over the administration of the city. Later at that year, a nationalist political party formed, called the Society for the Revival of Kurdistan (its Kurdish original name was, Komalay Jiyanaway Kurdistan or JK). Qazi Muhammad, member of a respected family in Mahabad elected as the chief of the new party. The party was under Soviet influence, but not control. Then, however, before the declaration of Kurdistan republic, the party elected a committee that started administering the area. The JK’s administration was successful for over five years until the fall of the republic. In 1945, the Kurdistan Democratic Party had started; all member of JK joined the new party. The new party asked for autonomy for Kurds whining the Iranian state not an independent one, Kurdish as an official language and asked for democracy in local administration. Generally, Soviet’s attitude toward Kurdish administration was ambivalent, and they didn’t support it clearly. Kurdish successful administration under Qazi Muhammad’s rule enhanced every aspect in the people’s life in this area.

In September 1945, Qzi Muhammad and other Kurdish leaders visited Soviet’s consul in Tabrez to seek for a new Kurdish republic, and they went to Azerbaijan for the same purpose. There they found that Azerbaijan’s Democratic Party is seeking a republic in Iranian Azerbaijan. On December 10, Azerbaijan’s Democratic Party took control over the East Azerbaijan province from Iranian troops and declared a republic; likewise, Qazi Muhammad decided to take the same step. After five days, on December 15, Kurdish people’s government was found in Mahabad. On January 22, 1946, Qazi Muhammad proclaimed the republic of Kurdistan in Mahabad. According to the republic’s Manifesto, they aimed to gain autonomy from Kurds inside the Iranian state, Kurdish become an official language in the area, electing locals to all official positions and unity and fraternity with Azerbaijanis. The republic was never seeking for independence out of Iranian limits. They aimed to gain autonomy and self-governing whining Iran. Kurdish printing spread throughout the area and a lot of publication were printing in the republic. That boosted the education and printing media in the area. Economically, even though, Soviet hadn’t done much to support Kurdistan republic in Mahabad, but it had an important rule in protecting the borders of the republic from Iranian forces’ intervention. Also as a kind of encouragement for the new-born republic, Soviet was buying the whole of the tobacco that was producing from that area. But regarding the military corporation, Soviet, neither did train the Kurdish republic’s fighters nor did supply them by weapons.

On March 26, 1946, under the pressure of Western powers especially United States, the soviets pledged the Iranian government to withdraw from northern Iran.
This step was the beginning of the end of both Mahabad and Azerbaijan republics. Firstly, in June, Iranian forces re-controlled the Iranian Azerbaijan. That was slow killing for Kurdistan republic of Mahabad. The republic isolated from all sides, eventually led to destruction of first and only Kurdish republic in the modern history. The main reason behind the republic’s destruction is clear, Soviet withdrawal from northern Iran, but there are some internal reasons as well. The Kurdistan republic hasn’t had a strong army. General Mustafa Barzani was the commander-in-chief in the republic’s government, but he didn’t have strong enough army to protect the republic from Iranian threats. The army was formed from voluntarily non-trained fighters. Another reason of Kurdistan republic’s collapse is tribal disagreements, a problem that all Kurdish movements suffered from throughout the history. During the republic’s governing, tribal chiefs didn’t help the republic because of their relation with the central government. Ironically, tribal leaders helped the Iranian forces to topple the Kurdistan republic in Mahabad that’s despite, they were Kurds. Tribal chiefs support for Iranian government instead of Kurdistan republic was disenchantment and fatal for the republic in the military aspect.

Diplomatically, likewise all other Kurdish movements, the Kurdistan republic’s ruling Kurdistan Democratic Party failed to gain support from superpowers. Although Soviet, one of the main powers at that time encouraged the foundation of Kurdistan republic, but when western powers pressed on it to pull out from Iran, it never thought about Kurdish and Azerbaijani republics because they never had a strategic alliance. Also, western powers especially United States did support Iranian government precisely because they didn’t have other choices. Kurds took Soviet’s side; they never attempted to gain western sympathy. There was a possibility of Western power’s support for Kurdish state if they asked their support; because of one reason which is they weren’t Iranian alliance either. Qazi Muhammad and other republic leaders’ insist of relations with Soviet led to republic’s demise. Some may say politics is like a card sometime the winds mayn’t blow in your favor, but the problem in republic’s case is they even didn’t pick a card to test their chance. The absence of accurate diplomatic skills together with tribal chiefs’ embroiled in fighting with their brothers led to Kurdistan republic’s demise.

The foundation of Kurdistan republic in Mahabad, first and only Kurdish republic in modern history, led to a crackdown aftermath. But it hasn’t finished the glimmer of hope in Kurdistan. General Mustafa Barzani after fleeing to Soviet for eleven twelve years, returned to Iraqi Kurdistan in 1958. Barzani started a new struggle for Kurdistan’s independence but this time in Iraqi part of Kurdistan. He gave another hope for Kurdish statehood. Also, in Kurdistan of Turkey the struggle started more actively in the wake of Kurdistan republic’s destruction. Iraqi Kurdistan liberated and gained self-governing with all other aims of Kurdistan republic in Mahanad. No one can deny military struggle’s role in the autonomy of Iraqi Kurdistan, but diplomatic struggle also had a vital role. Kurdish movement was sending representative to United States, western powerful countries, even to Israel to gain their support for Kurdish autonomy because they knew that they can’t achieved just by military struggle. The lake of diplomacy in other parts of Kurdistan halt their hope of self-governing. The quake of Kurdistan republic’s demise still affecting Kurds in Iran, they should wake and never lose hope, especially while the region live Arab nation’s uprising against their autocratic leaders. Kurds can invest this opportunity to gain more and more right to live in long awaited prosperous life. Moreover, the only reason that collapsed all Kurdish struggle toward self-governing is differences, so the unity and fraternity of all political parties is the guarantee of any future hope for Kurdish statehood.

* Abdulla Hawez Abdulla is studying politics and International Relations at University of Kurdistan – Hawler(UKH)

The so-called “degenerate” books were burning under Hitler’s dictatorship. It started from the capital of the third Reich, Berlin, with 20,000 books and went on in other German cities; the ordered was called (Säuberung) or “cleansing”. The Nazis burnt books with “non-German” ideas. Books written by Freud, Einstein, Thomas Mann, Jack London, H.G. Wells and many others go up in flames as they give the Nazi salute.

The target of this historically symbolic action was the suppression of free thoughts and ideas. The action was a tactic of Joseph Goebbels’ Ministry of Propaganda with the target of brainwashing a whole nation. The works of leading German writers such as Berthold Brecht, Lion Feuchtwanger, and Alfred Kerr were consigned to flames. The promotion of “Aryan” culture and the suppression of other forms of artistic production was yet another Nazi effort to “purify” Germany.

The Nazis were neither the first nor the last book-burners in history. Christianity has a longer history of defending an all-powerful deity by shielding the mind from strange ideas.

The “Dark Ages” of the Middle Ages in Europe is full of religious atrocity, many scientists were burnt with their ideas and books: Jean Calvin was probably the most efficient: in 1600, when he burned Michael Servetus at the stake for heresy, and around his waist were tied a large bundle of manuscript and a thick octavo printed book. Another notorious illustration of this was in July of 1562, when Bishop Diego de Landa burnet five thousand idols and many thousands of their written works.

Scientific inquiry had virtually no support in Western society from the 7th to 15th centuries. Bigoted Ecclesiasticism dammed the flow of free thought, blocking the seepage of knowledge within Western societies. Book was branded as magic and treasonous, and the writer or reader was punishable by torture or death. Bruno was burned at the stake for the crime of claiming that the earth rotates about its axis.

Several decades after the event of Islam in Arabia, Muslim invaders galloped into war to occupy new territories. They brutally destroyed great civilisations and of course all valuable libraries of conquered lands which were the symbol of knowledge and wisdom of those “non-Muslim” cultures. This early book-burning committed by the primitive Muslims paved the way for 1400 years of darkness and backwardness in the Middle East, North Africa and all lands conquered by Muslim invader

Muslim invaders arrived with sword in one hand and the Koran in the other. Since they believed the Koran was a divine revelation, it became the starting point for all knowledge. The Koran instructed them to seek science in all fields. It was in this perspective and under the shadow of Islamic influence that scientists, philosophers, poets and writers of occupied lands wrote their works. Even worse than the censorship, their works were influenced by their own self-alienation.

Centuries later, Muslim scientists, most of them Iranians, upheld the civilisation in the world when the West was in its lowest era of moral and intellectual obscurity. However, the Islamic civilisation appeared in a limited framework of progress due to its limit of progress allowed by religious restrains.

Today, the heritage of the Nazi’s and early Muslims’ book burning became the political Islam with its shocking results in the last 32 years in the Islamic world, especially in Iran.

Recalling not only the book-burning of 1933 by the Nazis, but also the early invasion of Islam in Iran, the regime launched in 1980 a cultural revolution to alienate Iranians from their pre-Islamic great civilisation by islamo-arbising the whole Iranian culture. Following the Cultural Revolution, bands of Hezbollah and Islamists attacked, destroyed, and burnt libraries in Iranian universities, libraries, bookshops. Millions of books were destroyed, and thousands of allegedly readers of such books were intimidated, beaten up, imprisoned or even executed.

Not only the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Ministry of Islamic Guidance and Culture now censors some of Iran’s best contemporary writers and researchers, such as Sadegh Hedayat, Sadegh Choobak, Ebrahim Golestan, Gholamhossein Sa’aedi, Ahmad Kasravi, Ali Dashti, Ebrahim Poordavoud, Zabih Behrouz, and others, but even in the recent years, they removed parts and whole pieces of works by well-known poets such as Souzani Samarghandi, Omar Khayam, Molana Jalaledin Rumi, Nezami Ganjavi, Abid Zakani, Iradj Mirza, and even some lexicons from Ali Akbar Dehkhoda and Farhang Mo’in as non-Islamic.

Like the Nazis in 1933, the Islamic Republic of Iran had also its own version of book burning and censorship, as thousands of titles of books are banned from publishing, as hundreds of thousands of books are destroyed by unfortunate publishers who have not been authorised of distributing the books.

The ruling Shiite ayatollahs are not solely aimed at stamping out ideas of freedom but for a more nefarious purpose and in a line with the early Muslim invaders: suppressing all and everything not adjusting to Islam or representing a character of pre-Islamic culture and civilisation of Iran.

What is the origin of Hijab? (with an emphasis on garments like Chador, Burqa and Abaya)

As the one who started the debate, I like to write my opinion here. Persian Chador dates back to pre-Islamic era and is not necessarily developed after introduction of Islam to Iran. It also applies to Arabs. They had these kind of Hijabs before Islam.

Also there is a verse in Quran which shows that Hijab has existed before establishment of Islam:

I think Hijab developed as a phenomenon related to patriarchy. For example, I as a Middle Easter man, always wanted to avoid other men observe my wife’s attractive body. That’s because they may be motivated to go after her and make my situation vulnerable. So I have forced my wife to wear something which vanished her sexual attractiveness. And here Hijab comes.

I confess I do not know the answer. Now its your turn to express your opinion.

I also like authors and visitors of Muslimah Media Watch contribute on the discussion and help us find the answer. Everyone is welcomed.

We also learn of Egyptian foreign minister mirroring his boss Hosni Mubarak to refuse to talk about human rights and freeing of political prisoners and instead kept emphasizing dangers of Hamas and their possible connections to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and to Iran. The way the governments work revealed via these cables proves what Barbara Tuchman had to say

“Wooden-headedness, the source of self-deception, is a factor that plays a remarkably large role in government. It consists in assessing a situation in terms of preconceived fixed notions while ignoring or rejecting any contrary signs. It is acting according to wish while not allowing oneself to be deflected by the facts. It is epitomized in a historian’s statement about Phillip II of Spain, the surpassing wooden-head of all sovereigns: No experience of the failure of his policy could shake his belief in its essential excellence ” (The March of Folly. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1984).

In short the released cables while theoretically showing a fear of Iran and Islamic spread in the Middle East will only discredit Arab leaders and encourage people to start to look for alternatives to what is now a clear axis of evil: the US government, Israel, and the reactionary dictatorial Arab leaders serving those. To be blunt, we had better possibilities in the 1960s and early 1970s to standing up to hegemonic US/Israeli designs of subjugating and dividing the Arab world than we do today. Today we face (with few exceptions) a solid block across the board of collaborative Arab regimes (known before but now clearly exposed via wikileaks with more to come) and a
mostly apathetic Arab public including many Palestinians. What are alternative organizing centers for the period to come of dissolution of dictatorships and empires and the bankruptcy of racist ideologies of chosenness? There are few possibilities:

1) Leftist secular traditional parties (PFLP, DFLP, PPP, Baathists, Nasserites etc). Each of these factions/parties is small on its own. They have lost much support after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Here I am not talking about financial or direct other support (it was relatively small and came to only few of these groups). I am talking about the general decline of the left around the world that ensued with the “perceived win” of the capitalist west. It was a strong PR campaign from many quarters that enhanced this perception (wrong as it is) that the decline of the soviet union meant that the unfettered free market system is the only game in town. I do not want here to enter into an analysis of this phenomenon. Others have done a far better job at it including candid and self-critical analysis by those belonging to those various (left) parties, factions, and liberation movement. But my point is that even with their reduced cadres due to this and other challenges (e.g. the dependence of some of them on financing through the Palestinian Authority dominated but emasculated PLO), they remain collectively a potent force for the future. When they did join forces (e.g. in selected local elections), this power can be manifested.

2) Islamic forces: Again I do not presume to try and analyze the power of these factions or their diversity let alone their potential to develop in positive directions that effect real change in their societies. But I think everyone agrees that such groups are indeed gaining adherents and carry a significant weight in the streets and that they will play a role in the future.

3) Decent individuals within Palestinian elites (governing bodies and business people) and even elites in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and other Arab countries. Of those I would give more possibilities for growth and providing decent alternatives to the status quo among Palestinians Lebanese (and perhaps Jordanians and Egyptians). Some may decide that even their own long term financial and societal positions are served better by challenging the status quo.

4) Independents: people with a conscience but who do not belong to political factions and are not associated with governments. Many of those are intellectuals who might finally move to activism as happened in the past (in Palestine and elsewhere).

These issues are increasingly being discussed by individuals within those sections of society. I believe it is possible to organize those (or most of them) into a coherent positive force that challenges the roads of wars, racism, colonization, and occupation. But my own humble opinion is:

A) Do not discount the likelihood of the dissolution of the Israeli/US empire on its own ala the Roman and Soviet empire out of their own arrogance, hubris, and disastrous policies (the signs are all around us from the $3 trillion dollar war on Iraq, to the attacks on the freedom flotilla, to the bitter arguments in Israeli society about the reliance of this 4th strongest state in the world on foreign aid to put out a few fires, literal and otherwise etc).

B) Do not discount people (Palestinians, other Arabs, internationals etc). History teaches us that when we discount what people are able to do, we are almost always wrong. Think of the perception of the French and after them
the US government of what the Vietnamese peasants could do in the few years just before their liberation. Think of South Africa in the early 1980s. Algeria in the 1940s and 1950s. India in the 1920s and 30s. Think of the US South in the 1940s. Even here in Palestine, just think of the dismissal and opinions of pundits about the end of Palestine offered in 1928 (before the 1929 uprising), 1935 (before the 1936 uprising), 1955, 1970, 1981, 1986, and 1999.

That even the US administration has stood unable to effect even the minor change in Israeli colonial settler activities is just one indication that we are reaching a dead end in the old ways and the new ways and new actors must step forward. Things will change as power shifts to the people. Around the world, many are now realizing what is happening and few are leading the way of change.

WIKILEAKS deserves protection, not threats and attacks.

Below are some excerpts from book. If its not yet translated to Arabic, I believe there is an emergency to do so.

The first paragraph of the introduction:

I was born into a Muslim family and grew up in a country that now describes itself as an Islamic republic. My close family members identify themselves as Muslim: some more orthodox, others less. My earliest memories are of my circumcision and my first day at Koranic school—psychoanalysts may make what they wish of that. Even before I could read or write the national language I learned to read the Koran in Arabic without understanding a word of it—a common experience for thousands of Muslim children. As soon as I was able to think for myself, I discarded all the religious dogmas that had been foisted on me. I now consider myself a secular humanist who believes that all religions are sick men’s dreams, false—demonstrably false—and pernicious.”

From Preface:

I am not a scholar or a specialist. I certainly do not lay claim to originality; I lean heavily on the works of real scholars. I present to the reader in a more digestible form what I have culled from their works. I have quoted extensively, and where I have not quoted, I have paraphrased, all with the proper acknowledgments in the notes and bibliography. There is hardly an image or thought that I can claim to be my own creation. If some critic were to dub this work “an extended annotated bibliography” 1 would not be offended.

From The Origins of Islam:

The most important stages in [Islam's] history were characterised by the assimilation of foreign influences, . . . Its founder, Muhammad, did not proclaim new ideas. He did not enrich earlier conceptions of man’s relation to the transcendental and infinite. . . . The Arab Prophet’s message was an eclectic composite of religious ideas and regulations. The ideas were suggested to him by contacts, which had stirred him deeply, with Jewish, Christian, and other elements.
“Ignaz Goldziher”

From Problems of Sources:

The Prophet Muhammad died in A.D. 632. The earliest material on his life that we possess was written by Ibn Ishaq in A.D. 750, in other words, a hundred twenty years after Muhammad’s death. The question of authenticity becomes even more critical, because the original form of Ibn Ishaq’s work is lost and is only available in parts in a later recension by Ibn Hisham who died in A.D. 834, two hundred years after the death of the Prophet.

The Zaynab Affair (pp. 99-100)

One day the Prophet set out to visit his adopted son Zaid. Zaid had been one of the earliest converts to Islam—the third, in fact—and he was very loyal to his foster father, who in return held him in high regard. Zaid was married to Zaynab bint Jahsh, a cousin of the Prophet. By all accounts—and this point is very important for our story—she was very beautiful. On the day concerned, Zaid was not at home, but Zaynab, rather lightly clad, and hence revealing a great many of her charms, opened the door to the Prophet, and asked him in. As she hastly prepared to receive him, Muhammad was smitten by her beauty: “Gracious Lord! Good Heavens! How you do turn the hearts of men!” exclaimed the Prophet. He declined to enter and went away in some confusion. However, Zaynab had heard his words and repeated them to Zaid, when he returned home. Zaid went straight to the Prophet and dutifully offered to divorce his wife for him. Muhammad declined, adding, “Keep your wife and fear God.” Zaynab now seemed quite taken with the idea of marrying the Prophet, and Zaid, seeing that Muhammad still yearned for her, divorced her. Still, fear of public opinion made Muhammad hesitate: after all, an adopted son was in every respect equal to a natural son; therefore, such a union would have been seen as incestuous by the Arabs of his time. As always, a revelation came to him in time, enabling him to “cast his scruples to the wind.” While Muhammad was sitting next to his wife Aisha, he suddenly went into one of his prophetic swoons. When he had recovered, he said, “Who will go and congratulate Zaynab and say that the Lord has joined her to me in marriage?” Thus
we find in sura 33.2—33.7 and 33.37-33.40:

God has not given to a man two hearts within him. . . . neither has He made your adopted sons to be as your own sons. . . . Let your adopted sons go by their own father’s name. This is more just with God. And it is not for a believer, man or woman, to have any choice in their affairs, when God and His Apostle have decreed a matter. . . . And remember, when you said to the person whom God has shown favor, and to whom you also have shown favor, “Keep your wife to yourself, and fear God” and you did conceal in your soul what God was about to reveal and you did fear [the opinion] of men when you should have feared God. And when Zaid had settled concerning her to divorce her, we married her to you, that it might not be a crime in the faithful to marry the wives of their adopted sons, when they have settled the affair concerning them. God’s bidding must be performed. Muhammad is not the father of any man among you, but he is the Apostle of God, and the seal of the Prophets.

The most natural and immediate reaction to the preceding account must surely be that of the Prophet’s own wife, Aisha, who is said to have remarked wittily on this occasion, “Truly your God seems to have been very quick in fulfilling your prayers.”