How the Arab Media is Watching the Iranian Election
The Arab world’s relations with Iran is not uniform and neither is the media coverage. Iran has both its allies and its enemies in the Arab media and below is an overview of the news reports on the election. I’ll break it down by those supporting Ahmadinejad’s victory as legitimate and those contesting the legitimacy (to varying degrees) of the election results.
AHMADI-BYE-BYE
Al-Sharq al-Awsat: The Saudi-owned London-based paper is framing the election as a full-on “battle” between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi. The paper legitimizes the Opposition by referring to the protests as “demonstrations” as opposed to the “riots” label used in other papers. The paper goes further to label Mousavi’s supporters as the “Reformist Opposition.” In an unparalleled move, the paper is publishing photos of Iranian security forces in civilian clothes harassing demonstrators. (This has wider implications because many Arab readers will draw a direct parallel between the undercover security forces in their own country.) I won’t simplify the paper’s editorial decisions as an indicator of its willingness to tow the Saudi line, but their coverage clearly pushes in favor of a new Iranian regime.
Al-Quds al-Arabi: The Arab world’s token recalcitrant newspaper is clearly in favor of “reform” in the Iranian government. Just like al-Sharq al-Awsat, the election is not just an election — it is a struggle between the reformers and the hard-liners.
Al-Jazeera: Any time there are street demonstrations of a political nature, regardless of the country, al-Jazeera will be there. The top breaking news on al-Jazeera’s site is that two Mousavi supporters were killed by “militants’ bullets” and articles begin by describing the massive crowds that have gathered to support Mousavi. Their coverage is comprehensive and puts CNN to shame. On top of their coverage, the channel is monitoring Western media coverage of the elections, allowing the viewer/reader to put events into context and not be overwhelmed by the constant stream of raw information.
AHMADINEJAD MIGHT’VE WON
Al-Manar: I suspected that Hezbullah’s satellite channel would be lauding the election results after its secretary general Nasrallah sent a congratulatory letter to Ahmadinejad, but Hezbullah’s loyalties are to Khameini and since Khameini has called for the review of election complaints, the channel is regurgitating his official statements. Al-Manar refers to the protesters as “demonstrators” and is providing ungarnished information about the elections. If anything, the channel is taking direct statements from Iranian officials, re-wording them, and adding in up-to-date information. Overall, the channel is downplaying the reactions on the Iranian street and will be supportive of any official government conclusions on the integrity of the vote.
HE WON, STOP ASKING QUESTIONS
State Media in Syria: Even though the most important story today in the Syrian press is President Assad’s trip to Armenia, I’m going to make a very general statement that is supported by my quick read-through of the Syrian state-media (al-Baath, al-Thawra, and al-Tishreen) and say that they support an Ahmadinejad victory and don’t want to agitate relations with Ahmadinejad in any way. The public face of the strong Syrian-Iranian ties has been strategic buddy shots of Assad and Ahmadinejad. To even begin to suggest that the Iranian public might have been electorally swindled is a big no-no.
Also, the state media is treading lightly around the issue considering that the Iranians have a real Opposition which is contesting election results openly and demonstrating in the streets. The Syrian press seeks to delegitimize the Opposition at any cost and refers to them as “rioters” and claims that the Iranian police have arrested individuals who sought to “incite violence.” A true depiction of the Iranian security forces roughing up innocent protesters and silencing dissent would ring too many bells at home.
I expected slightly different coverage from the only private newspaper in Syria, al-Watan, but was dissapointed. The paper is private only in name, but its reporters are given more leeway in reporting foreign affairs. I suppose Iran is not foreign enough. The paper had a mere two articles on the election and didn’t stray far from the official line.
Dissident party forms from Southern Sudan’s ruling party SPLA
(Map from BBC)
A dissident political party has spun from the ranks of the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army — the de facto ruling party in autonomous Southern Sudan — which will be under the leadership of former SPLA official Lam Akol. Using all anonymous sources, al-Sharq al-Awsat reports that SPLA dissidents formed the party after grievances with corrupt leadership and administrative failure in Southern Sudan. The source said:
We are a popular party holding principles which we will fight for, but we found that administrative failure and corruption in Southern Sudan under the current leadership of the SPLA called for the formation of a new party to correct matters in the South and to implement a peace process.
The new party is called the Sudanese Popular Movement for Democratic Change and sources claim it will ally itself with Hassan Turabi’s Popular Conference party. The anonymous source also emphasized that Akol is not the “president” of the party — he is the spiritual, political, and historical leader.
All this takes place in the context of Sudan’s upcoming elections to be held in July.
Al-Sharq al-Awsat is a Saudi-owned, London-based newspaper and I’ve found that its position on Sudan pretty much reflects Saudi’s position, meaning Sudanese President Omar Bashir is a menace to peace and stability and is attempting to sabotage any prospects for legit elections in July. Albeit, this analysis is not too far off, but it’s interesting to contrast al-Sharq al-Awsat’s coverage with outlets like Qatari-owned al-Jazeera which give Bashir ample air-time to make breathy speeches on Arab unity.
Kurdistan, Israel, and Peace
(Picture of Prime Minister of Kurdistan Nechirvan Barzani)
The question of peace with Israel hovers over every state in the Middle East (even those who have made peace). Egypt did it, Jordan did it — are they better off now? Syria refuses, Iran refuses — what price have they paid
Now, the question is: In Iraq’s near/distant future, will they do it?
As representatives of a semi-autonomous region of Iraq, Kurdistan and its leaders normally have opinions that differ from their Iraqi federal counterparts. Israel might be one of those issues. In an interview with al-Sharq al-Awsat, Prime Minister of Kurdistan Nechirvan Barzani said that Kurdistan will deal with Israel just as they deal with all other countries, but at the same time, he does not plan on normalizing relations with the country. He also denies that Israeli companies are operating in Kurdistan under pseudonyms.
Tashweesh
Tashweesh = Static (like on a phone line)
I listened to about half of Nasrallah’s speech from today (it’s very long) and here are my rough notes. The media has not captured the gist of Nasrallah’s speech and have taken provocative statements out of context, i.e, what did Nasrallah really mean when he said that removing Hezbullah’s telephone lines was tantamount to a declaration of war? I have outlined some of his major points at the beginning:
- Hezbullah’s telephone lines are not part of an effort to usurp the Lebanese government. They have been in place since 2000 and the government has been aware of them. These telephone lines are not for general or international use, they are only intended for usage among Hezbullah’s leadership. Every army relies on communication and since Hezbullah does not have the man-power of technology of the United States, this is how the leadership maintains contact.
- Taking down these telephone lines is tantamount to an act of war because without this form of communication, Hezbullah’s leadership is vulnerable to assassinations and are left without protection.
Lebanon has entered a new era. The leaders in power must realize that the decisions made at the last sitting of Parliament have begun a new era, just as when Prime Minister Rafiq al-Hariri was assassinated – it is a Lebanon not like before.
Nasrallah then discusses (for a very long time) the nature of the telephone lines and how communications are essential to any armed force. He says that all armies, even ancient armies, have had different ways to communicate and this communication was a necessity. He then talks about the technology behind the lines and says that during times of conflict, enemy armies target telephone lines and create static, preventing communication.
He says that when telephone lines are exposed, it is easier for the enemy to target them. Also, he says that the Resistance does not have the large troops or technology that the United States or Israel has.
He goes on to dispel all notions about the nature of the telephone lines. He says they are used for communication among Hezbullah’s leadership and nothing more. This process of facilitating communications is absolutely essential for the Resistance – as seen in the July War and in other victories of the Resistance.
All of you know that these telephone lines have been in place before the year 2000 and after – these telephone lines are nothing new. Hezbullah has met with the government several times and explained that this network won’t extend to the mountains, Kasrwan, the north, or the Chouf mountains – we don’t need it to. This line goes from Dahiyya (southern Beirut) to the south of Lebanon. This network is specifically for the leadership of Hezbullah and not for general use, in fact, it doesn’t have the capacity for general use. It’s also not for international use. He goes into extensive detail on how Hezbullah and the government had worked out a deal to keep the telephone lines up, and how they even showed the lines to the government.
He then talks about how the government is not under the control of PM Fouad Siniora (al-mskeen, poor guy), but it’s under the control of Walid Junblatt – who takes orders from Condoleezza Rice.
After that, he mentions the French Socialist who was taking photos in Dahiyeh and was “kidnapped” by Hezbullah. He laughs at this and says that he was brought there by the Lebanese Socialist Party (of which Junblatt is the head). He said that security is taken very seriously, and even moreso with leaders and members of Hezbullah.
Now, the new decision is saying that Hezbullah telephone lines are not legal and that they are a threat to the state. He says that this decision is equal to declaring war and starting a war. This is a war launched by the government of Junblatt — on behalf of America and Israel — on the weapons of the Resistance. He says that this decision reveals the true nature of this political faction. Furthermore, this decision is the part of an effort to strip the Resistance’s leaders of protection, of infrastructure and lay them bare to assassinations.
Mark your calendars.
The anniversaries of two equally impactful and violent events in the Arab world took place this week.
April 9, 1948: Over half a century ago, Jewish soldiers killed over 200 Palestinians in the village of Deir Yassin. The village was completely demolished and the land today is a part of the state of Israel. (The above cartoon is from al-Hayat and the text reads: Anniversary of the Deir Yassin Massacre, the massacre continues after 60 years.)
April 13, 1975: The 33rd anniversary of the breaking out of the Lebanese Civil War. On this day 33 years ago, the Christian Phalangist party (Kita’ib) killed 30 Palestinians on a bus in the Beirut neighborhood Ain al-Roummaneh. The group of Palestinians was returning home from a commemoration of the Deir Yassin Massacre. Hours earlier, gunmen had fired on a church, killing four Christians. (The above image is from al-Hayat and the text reads: Beirut, 1975.)
Key to the Kaaba sold to anonymous bidder
Al-Jazeera reports that one out of the 58 keys to the Kaaba was sold to an anonymous bidder at Sotheby’s for $18.1 million. All the other keys are currently in museums and this is the only known key to be in the hands of an individual.
The key is 37 cm long, made of iron, and dates back to the Abbasid era.
Eighteen-million is a lot of money, so shouldn’t we be able to narrow down a list of possible bidders? No?
No more new episodes of LOST this Thursday
So, that means you can come listen to a talk from Iraqi poet and activist Sinan Antoon on the University of Texas campus. The talk is titled “Debris and Diaspora: Iraqi Culture Now.” Here’s a quote from an interview he did with Democracy Now in 2007:
AMY GOODMAN: And your response to proposals like those of Senator Biden, the Democratic presidential candidate, to divide Iraq up, forget trying to keep it together, let there be a place of the Shia, a place of the Sunni, a Kurdistan?
SINAN ANTOON: I even wrote an article about that. First of all, it is not up to Senator Biden or any other senator to tell Iraqis how they should live their lives or divide their country. That’s number one.
Number two is the problem of this perspective of Sunni, Shiite and Kurd. It’s been repeated ad nauseum so that now it seems real. The fact is, these categories are not functioning categories, as well. And these are the product of the United States’ imperialist look upon Iraq. Sadly, since the invasion and because of the political system that Bremer put in place, he turned these ethno-religious identities into political identities, because they put the quota system in the governing council. But ten or fifteen years ago, people did not define themselves primarily as Sunni or Shiite and Kurds, you know. There were other kinds of identifications.
But, about LOST. The Washington Post did a “March Madness”-type bracket to determine the audience’s favorite character. Out of 64 characters, it came down to a battle between the Scottish character Desmond and the “Iraqi” character Sayid.
Of course, ABC did not choose an Arab to play the Arab character. They chose British-born (possible Indian roots) Naveen Andrews, as seen here in the English Patient:
And here, looking all sweaty and torturey on the beaches of LOST:
Sayid did not win the LOST bracket, but he did have some impressive victories over some other popular characters which at least shows that Sayid is not only a central character in LOST, but he is also well-liked. Besides the ultimate cop-out of ABC hiring an Indian actor to play an Iraqi, Sayid is an attractive character because he possesses some of the most admirable characteristics: He is loyal; He has useful skills; And he is courageous.
I fell into ABC’s trap, but there are still major issues I have with Sayid’s character. One, in his non-island life, he was a “torturer” for the Republican Guard. He tortured hundreds of people and then, on the island, he tortured some more people. He is the only character with a military background and there are repeated references to Sayid being a “torturer.” I don’t think this takes away from his affability, but it is a well-trodded stereotype.
I’m sure there is much more to be said about this, but I’ll just leave you with this photo of Sawyer from his pre-LOST days. He was the guy that stole Alicia Silverstone’s purse in the Cryin’ Aerosmith video! Thanks to this person for the find.
EVENT INFO
“Debris and Diaspora: Iraqi Culture Now” Thursday, April 10 at 7PM in the Pharmacy Building (PHR) 2.114
“الشيوعي العراقي الاخير” Friday, April 11 at 11AM in the Chicano Culture Room in the Texas Union.
Yemen is the poorest country in the Arab world
At least that’s what this AP article would have us believe! The article ends with this charming description of Yemen:
Yemen, the poorest country in the Arab world, is Osama bin Laden’s ancestral homeland and has a persistent al-Qaida movement that has attacked and killed foreigners on several occasions.
It is true that either al-Qaida or a movement inspired by al-Qaida has attacked and killed foreigners in Yemen. But — the “poorest country in the Arab world” and “Osama bin Laden’s ancestral homeland” — that’s just lazy and incomplete journalism.
By what standard is Yemen the poorest country in the Arab world? Is it because every single hectare of land has not been penetrated by Western development agencies? Is it based on some World Bank calculation of GDP and other bullshit statistics? To label a country as the “poorest country in the Arab world” is placing all kinds of Western-guided standards on a population which has seemingly rejected many of these practices.
Furthermore, the discussion of “poverty” in the context of “terrorism” (the AP article was a brief on an explosion at a foreigner housing compound in Sanaa) is fraught with all sorts of errors and latent suggestions for “solutions” to this poverty. Specifically, the World Bank is already very active in Yemen — so, by connecting “poverty” with “terrorism” could be a possible impetus for the Bank’s further encroachment on Yemen’s local economic structures. Poverty is not at the root of terrorism.
As for the claim of Yemen being Bin Laden’s “ancestral homeland” — this might be true, but it’s probably also true for, like, half of the Arabs in the Middle East! Many of the Shi’a of Jabal Amal (southern Lebanon) also claim ancient roots in Yemen from companions of the Prophet Mohammad, but this fact is not mentioned in every article about southern Lebanon! The attempt to portray Yemen as this dark country, full of “poverty” and relatives of Bin Laden is irresponsible at best, and a propaganda tool for Western companies and development agencies at worst.
Sectarian Battles on YouTube
While watching al-Jazeera’s exclusive interview with Muqtada al-Sadr (his first televised appearance in about a year) on YouTube, I scrolled down to read the comments. We all know anonymous commenting on YouTube empowers assholes to be bigger assholes and I don’t want to provide a platform for the hatred and prejudice that some people espouse (since these people are usually a minority), but I do want to highlight how sectarian tensions have manifested themselves on YouTube.
Here is the comment from YouTube user “TruthDaTruth” which prompted further investigation:
dirty filthy muqtada the aeroplane of sadri is worthless
The YouTube user “TruthDaTruth” obviously typed his original Arabic into a bad online translator which resulted in “al-Tiyyar al-Sadri” or the Sadr Current/Wing being translated into the “aeroplane of sadri.” In Arabic, “tiyyar” literally means current, like an air or water current, but it used to mean political currents as well. So, the “aeroplane of Sadr” is literally the “Sadr current.”
Anyways — I checked out the guy’s profile and there is an interesting mix of insults and compliments being hurled at TruthDaTruth. (It appears possible that TruthDaTruth is Sunni and harbors some resentment toward Shi’a, but I, nor any of the commenters, know this person’s true identity.)
The comment breakdown:
1) Insults from Shi’a or supporters of Shi’a who do not appreciate his Shi’a bashing.
saudi wahabi lozer,,, saudi wahabi lozer to hell with zarkawi el zarbawi haha and to hell with bin laden bin monkeys hahahaha
2) Insults from individuals who are anti-Muslim and not discriminating between sects.
fuck you, why u named after a Christian rapper u dumb fucked up muslim hahahaha go suck off ya imam u faggot ass bitch
you muslim prick. if you fuckers didnt fly planes into the twin towers there wouldnt be wars all over the shit muslim countries…..
Internet as “Real” Speech
I think that many of us define certain Internet spaces as a “community” of sorts. We post videos, photos, and journals on the Internet and many times, people respond. The purpose of this post is to show how certain types of Internet communities are host to some very negative and racist ideas and how they do not serve any constructive purpose whatsoever. I think we have to ask how these Internet “communities” translate into “real” life — but at the same time — I think this question is problematic since the Internet is becoming more integrated into our everyday lives. By this, I mean that the “anonymous commenter” may appear to be a faceless, distant Internet user, but in many societies where the Internet is pervasive, the speech that is made online may just as well have been made face-to-face. Speech made on the internet is “real” speech and should be treated as a tangible phenomenon and not something that exists in some “digital” world of little consequence.
Are you a Badri or Sadri?
Leader of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council Abdul Aziz al-Hakim meets with George W. Bush in 2006.
Muqtada al-Sadr did not meet George W. Bush in 2006.
Both Muqtada al-Sadr and Abdul Aziz al-Hakim represent the Shi’a in Iraq. But they represent the Shi’a in very different ways — through their conflicting political movements and military wings.
Sadr’s military wing — or Jaysh al-Mehdi — is in direct opposition to Hakim’s (and the SIIC’s) Badr Wing. One of the factors which creates a divide between the two is relations with the Occupying Forces. Despite anti-Occupation rhetoric and conflict with the United States, Sadr’s movement surely has ties with the US and has engaged in different agreements with the US, as seen by Sadr’s recent cease-fire. Yet Hakim and the SIIC (formerly SCIRI) have cultivated ties with the US since Shock and Awe.
Badri vs. Sadri*
An al-Hayat article from Husayn Ali Dawod explains this internal Shi’i division in light of the recent battles between Iraqi Forces and Jaysh al-Mehdi. He says that differences between the groups have intensified since the recent fighting.
The author explains that individuals who are loyal to Sadr but live in areas controlled by the Badr wing conceal their loyalties to Sadr, and vice versa. For example, if a person has a photo of Sadr on their car and are coming to a government checkpoint, the photo must come down. Sources say that both factions have elaborate intelligence networks which determine people’s allegiances.
Some common slogans seen on building walls in areas loyal to Sadr are: Bring Down the New Maliki dictatorship; Bring Down Hakim — an agent (‘ameel) of the US. Meanwhile, in the Hakim-loyal districts of Karada and Washash in Baghdad, you find slogans that express support for the government
*In Arabic, you can create an adjective by adding an “ee” sound to many words. So, if one is loyal to the Badr Wing, then you can be called a “Badri,” the same is true for “Sadri.” The female form would be “Badriyeh” or “Sadriyeh.”
This picture of Sadr is in not really relevant to anything, but I just wanted to remind you all that he is RADICAL and EVIL and HATES AMERICA and wears a BLACK CAPE.
Awwwww
In the wake of all this Mickey-Hamas-Promoting-Terrorism stuff, I think now is the time to clear up some misunderstandings about Islam, children’s shows, and politics. The above graphic is from a children’s show called “al-Manar al-Saghrir” (the little Manar — or lighthouse) broadcast on Hezbullah’s satellite station al-Manar. Besides the scary-looking sun, there’s nothing “terroristic” about this show.
I also think the Hamas children’s show was taken out of context and judged unfairly. Any children’s show that is produced from the Gaza Strip must be understood in the context of daily violence, family deaths, widespread unsanitary conditions, and military occupation. The whole “leave the children out of it” argument is essentially null. Political ideologies shouldn’t be forced on to children, but it is understandable that explanations for daily living conditions are included in broadcasts.
Either way, the Hamas program is a very small slice of children’s programing in the Arab world. Below are some clips which show just how dangerous those Arabs really are!
Here is a show about a “strange car” named “Boumbo” which is pretty much the cutest thing I’ve ever seen:
Here are the opening credits for the show “Iftah ya Sim Sim” or Open Sesame:
Sadr releases statement calling for end of armed conflict
Muqtada al-Sadr released a nine-point statement calling for an end to the “manifestations of arms.” Here is a copy of the statement in Arabic from Inbaa news service and here are a few of the points below:
- Put an end to all manifestations of arms in Basra and all other districts.
- Stop all house-raids (al-mudahunaat) and all random, illegal arrests.
- Call on the government to apply a general amnesty (al-’afo) law and a release of all prisoners who have not been proved guilty, especially those from the Sadr Wing (al-tiyar al-sadri).
Jaysh al-Mehdi calls for end to US and British Occupation
Iraqi soldiers hand over their weapons to a follower of Muqtada al-Sadr in Sadr City in Baghdad. (Al-Hayat via Informed Comment.)
The recent fighting in Iraq between Iraqi security forces and Jaysh al-Mehdi has laid bare many alliances and foe-ships. I can’t offer any analysis on this web of complex relationships and motives, but here are some reports from Arabic sources on what’s happening on the ground.
Al-Hayat
Al-Hayat reports that according to official accounts, 275 have been killed and over 500 injured in the past week of violence. PM Nuri al-Maliki has renewed his commitment to fight Jaysh al-Mehdi until the end, but supporters of Sadr say that they refuse “to hand over any weapons unless the government banishes the Occupation.” Similar sentiments have been echoed by Shaykh Zahir al-Khafaji, the military leader of the Jaysh al-Mehdi in Najaf: “Handing over weapons is impossible until the occupation has left the country.”
From these reports, the demands of Muqtada al-Sadr’s followers are clear: The US and British occupation must end.
Al-Hayat also notes that the US Military has deepened their involvement in the conflict in by launching several air strikes in Basra and Sadr City. These strikes have led to the deaths and injuries of dozens of people. (Al-Hayat)
Image of a demonstration of Muqtada al-Sadr’s followers form al-Jazeera.
The Summit must go on!
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and the Emir of Qatar.
No Shows: King of Jordan Abdallah II, President of Yemen Ali abd al-Salah, King of Saudi Arabia Abdallah bin abd al-Aziz, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Sultan of Oman, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, the King of Morocco, and Lebanon.
Shows: Eleven Arab leaders including Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, the President of Algeria, the Emir of Qatar, and some other dudes. Eighteen leaders were present at last year’s summit in Riyadh.
Summit Time!
Algerian President Abdalaziz Boutflika and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. One is short; the other is tall!
Double-chin twins! Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem and head of the Arab League Amr Moussa.
Double-chins for everyone! Qaddhafi looks fat!
Assad intimidates Palestinian President Abbas by grabbing his bicep. Hot!
I am calling men fat because this label is normally disproportionately saved for women.
Information and Photos from al-Jazeera and al-Thawra.
Syrian newspaper publishes obscenely long article on the Damascus Summit
Syrian newspaper al-Thawra has unnecessarily published an epic-length article on the Damascus Summit which is scheduled to begin tomorrow. Several Arab governments have sent low-level ministers to the summit in order to express disapproval of Syria’s role in Lebanon’s presidential crisis. Lebanon has boycotted the summit entirely. The article from al-Thawra is just like twenty press releases jumbled together: Peace, blah blah, Israel, Golan, blah blah, Arab ministers, Occupation.
Here is Lebanon’s empty seat at the Summit. (al-Nahar)
Al-Jazeera has an article on Syrian cartoonist Ali Farzat whose work is quite controversial. (Here is his homepage.) The cartoon below depicts his sentiments on Arab summits in general.
But, resistance is futile.
