*** The Session Has Begun. Please Submit Your Questions. ***
Answer
.
Name
Avi Gissin
- United States
Profession
Question
The U.S. has constantly been accusing Israel of so called assassinations...and telling Israel to withdraw when it is under terrorist attack..why is the U.S. favoring the barbaric Palestinians?
Answer
First of all, the majority of the world believes the U.S. strongly supports Israel over the Palestinians. Second, the major source, and indeed primary source of conflict in the Arab-Israeli problem is 34 years of Israeli occupation under harsh conditions that have driven the Palestinians to greater radicalism.
Terrorism -- a genuine problem -- is the result of this occupation and will only cease eventually when the occupation is ended and the Palestinians have a viable state.
Name
Faisal Siddiqui
- United States
Profession
Question
Do you think that the term "terrorism" is currently masking a racist element, that only Muslim "extremists" are being labeled with the term, because only Muslims are the ones the U.S. is after in this "war on terrorism" (even possible expansion to Iraq and Palestine, and with Pakistan already shutting down one Kashmiri group) or will this "war" include Sendero Luminoso, the Real IRA, etc...
Answer
The U.S. is concerned about the totality of terrorism wherever it appears in the world. There are numerous non-Muslim organizations on the terrorist list, which include two Jewish organizations, many Latin American organizations, a Greek and a Sri Lankan organization, among others.
Unfortunately, the reality is that the most prominent terrorist movements in recent years have tended to come from the Muslim world. Furthermore, many of these movements openly proclaim their association with Islam in explicit terms. We have Hizbullah, we have Jaish –e (army of) Muhammad, we have Jund Allah (troops of God), we have Jamiat Islamiyah, and Islamic Jihad, just to name a few. So Muslim extremists themselves are drawing attention to their connection with Islam. The reasons for terrorism emerging from the Muslim world today are complex and multiple, including frustrations, grievances, a perception that the U.S. is hostile to the Muslim world, and American close ties with Israel and authoritarian regimes in the area.
Name
Soaad Elgindy
- United States
Profession
Question
The U.S. administration is once again calling calling for Israel to accept a Palestinian state, at the 1967 borders, and with East Jerusalem as the capital.
Are we listening to the same old rhetoric spewed forth during the Gulf War just because the US needs Arab and Muslims support? or will Palestine finally be established...and if so why hasnt teh US put a stop to Israels invasions of the West Bank and Gaza adn the killing of Palestinains and leaders?
Answer
The progress towards achieving a viable Palestinian state has been disappointingly slow, from my point of view. Yet, I believe the administration fully recognizes that the bleeding sore of the Palestinian problem remains the single biggest obstacle to better relations with the Muslim world. I believe there has been progress and there will be more progress. At the same time, the hardline characteristics of the Sharon government is angering the U.S. and complicating its policies. I have some hope that we will see serious steps forward in the next month or so. Although the peace process ended inconclusively one year ago, the fact is that in the five years preceding, major changes had taken place among the three parties - the U.S., Israel, and Palestine. Arafat was welcome in the White House, and Israel made the best offer yet to the Palestinians. That offer is still not sufficient, but is getting closer to a more acceptable solution. I am not optimistic in the very short term, but am quite optimistic about prospects in the next year or two.
Name
Alicia
- United States
Profession
Question
How is the definition of terrorism different now than it was, say, in the 1980's? Is there even a coherent definition of terrorism right now? It seems like every religious Islamic group in the world is being branded either "radical" or possibly "terrorist."
Answer
There is indeed a serious problem in reaching an agreement on the definition of terrorism. The interests of all states are reflected in their particular definition of terrorism. In my view, a minimal definition of terrorism is the killing of innocent women and children and bystanders as part of a terrorist act. In the '80s, there was great talk of "state-sponsored terrorism." Today, we recognize that terrorism does not have to be state-sponsored, and indeed, in recent times, has mostly been non-state-sponsored.
A second problem is that undemocratic states like to brand their political opponents with the accusation of terrorism in order to avoid any political dialogue. This leads to support for the war against terrorism by many states that accuse all of their opponents of terrorism.
Third, there is a more modern problem of domestic terrorism on the part of the state against its own peoples or minorities. In the past, the state was acknowledged to have the right to exercise force within its boundaries. Today that right is no longer accepted on a blanket basis, such as Saddam Hussein's attack against Kurds, Shi’a, and other Iraqi citizens.
Finally, we must try to distinguish between guerrilla operations and terrorism. These definitions are politicized by everyone according to their interests, but even Washington has been forced to recognize that Hizbullah attacks against Israeli occupation in southern Lebanon are not terrorism, but guerrilla warfare.
Name
Mustafa
- United States
Profession
Legal
Question
As a political scientist and senior reseracher, kindly give you realistic and honest assesment as to what are the chances of survival of the Saudi monarchy and Egyptian dictatorship in this century. Many researchers have recently written that the fall of an absolute monarchy in Saudi Arabia and the Islamist takeover of Egypt are inevitable. A matter of "when" rather than "if". How will this upset or benefit the establishment of a New World Order?
Answer
I believe that all authoritarian regimes that do not enjoy the support of their people are doomed to collapse. Saudi Arabia and Egypt are two such cases, but not the only ones by any means. I absolutely believe that one of the very root causes of constant turmoil, anger, bitterness, frustrations and hopelessness is the inability of the people in the region to determine their own fates and get rid of undesirable leaders.
This process must take place as soon as possible.
But we must also be realistic that any transition from authoritarianism to democracy is potentially chaotic and destabilizing. The transition will often be rough and in some states, we may end up with new and unpleasant authoritarian regimes. Washington fears that Islamist movements will be the beneficiaries of democratic opening, in many cases. Yet Washington must recognize two things; one is that there are a huge variety of Islamist movements, some radical and worrisome, others more democratic and responsible. We must encourage these more democratic movements to enter the political process, gain experience, and learn how to act wisely in the political order.
Second, the longer we postpone democratization, the greater the pressures will be and the more explosive the transition will be as well.
Democratization is never convenient, but it's nonetheless absolutely essential and must be part of Washington's broader policies in the Muslim world.
Name
Mediha Aly
- United Kingdom
Profession
Question
Who are going to be defined as terrorists? The groups in Kashmir fighting for independence, the Palestinian resistance groups? (Hamas limits its activities to within Israel, are they terrorists?, or resistance, freedom fighters, battling occupation?)
Answer
I've offered some general thoughts on this problem in an earlier question. But certainly, Muslim minorities that suffer from oppression and misrule, as in Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya, Western China, will turn to violence in the name of both ethnicity and Islam to promote their cause. Naturally, from the point of view of the government, their use of force makes them terrorists. But we must recognize that most of these people are given little other alternative by which to pursue their goals of a better and freer life that will preserve their culture.
Name
Mike
- United States
Profession
Network admin
Question
What is the "new world Order" and who are the perpitrators of this order.
Answer
An impossibly complex question. The newest elements of the world in the past decade are the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and massive increase in communication technology, including Internet. The U.S. is the most powerful force in the world today -- economically, militarily, culturally, and in democracy at home -- but that does not mean that the U.S. can truly control the world as it wishes. Globalization is a technological and social process that is beyond the control of any state, and many fear it within the U.S.
The interests and power of other countries, especially Western Europe and East Asia, are rising and the U.S. will not be able to conduct its foreign policies in the long run without close attention to these other interests.
Name
Khalid
- United States
Profession
Question
It has been reported that Ariel Sharon will visit the US in the near future, there are several reports that Powell is preparing a major initiative regarding the ME where the admin will put forth it vision for the Palestinian/Israeli conflect. Can you share with us what you know about this new/old vision and what might be porposed
Answer
I have no privileged knowledge of the details of this plan, but I understand that for the first time, the U.S. may set forth its own vision of a just, final solution, rather than leaning on a frustrating "peace process" that has not gone anywhere. We all know what the rough outline of the fair and just final settlement should be. The problem is really in many small details, and how to get there.
I suspect neither party will be fully happy with all of this vision, but such a statement should enable more rapid progress to take place.
Name
Sameena Husain
- United States
Profession
Student
Question
The United States has finally recognized that its foreign policies abroad have a direct impact on ordinary people throughout the world. How does the US view the so called freedom fighters, Mujahideen (who are presently fighting for the freedom of Kashmir), while the Indians refer to them as terrorists. And is there any possibility that the UN resolution (which is about half-a-century old) will finally be implemented : the right to give Kashmir a referendum and allow them to chose once and for all which country they want to be a part of?
Answer
Please see my comments on terrorism in earlier answers.
In the case of Kashmir, I believe Washington recognizes that none of the parties -- India, Pakistan, or the Kashmiris -- can settle this problem as it stands. The problem is complicated by the almost dominating presence of non-Kashmiri mujahideen in Kashmir. The fact that both Pakistan and India are nuclear states raises the level of danger to new heights. I hope that Washington, as part of its war against terror, will examine not just the origin and tactics of the fighters, but also the deeper causes of the problem.
I frankly doubt we will ever get back to a referendum as called for 50 years ago, but I suspect that a solution giving the Kashmiris very special autonomy should be achievable. Ultimately, I believe all minorities should have a right to separate or remain in the state in which they were forced to live by historical processes. The responsibility lies with all states to satisfy those minority aspirations, but in an imperfect world, we may have to settle for healthy doses of autonomy in the meantime.
Name
Hasan
- United States
Profession
Question
Why is it that Israelis can assissinate Palestinian leaders at will and not be branded terrorists, and then when an Israeli leader is assassinated, the Palestinians are terrorists once again? How are the Israeli acts any different, especially when they are the ones who initiated the assassinations?
Answer
Israel's great benefit is that it is a state, and the Palestinian fighters are not a state. By some aspects of international law, this could be interpreted as internal rebellion.
You are right; the issue is a complete double standard, but I think it is widely recognized as such by most people in the world, including Washington. I believe Washington has expressed its displeasure -- especially privately -- but more must be said and done on this issue. I believe Washington recognizes that Israel partly brought this on itself through its own assassination policies. Israel, through its harsh policies, has lost the moral ground in the eyes of most of the world, and even in the U.S. no longer enjoys a position of general support and approbation.
Name
Wael Shahabo
-
Profession
Question
I have read a few articles linking the ideas or extreme beliefs of bin laden to moderater Islamic movements like those in Egypt and Pakistan, articles in bbc and abc. The articles claim that these movements intiated the extreme islamic fundamentalist thought that bin laden subscribes to. Do you think the us foreign policy will broaden its target to these movements even though they condemn terrorism, don't subscribe to them, and use only peaceful poltical and educational means to vioce their values?
Answer
At the practical level, this war against terrorism is against clear acts of violence and terror, and not against radical ideas. We must maintain this distinction. Radical ideas are a possible source of concern in themselves, but when they are translated into violent actions, it becomes everybody's concern. Any zealot can take some basic ideological principles and turn them into weapons of war, if he wishes. Muslims in particular have the obligation to debate and determine what they believe to be acceptable forms of behavior and desirable bodies of belief. The West cannot interpret Islam for the Muslims.
The responsibility on Muslim shoulders is growing all the time with these new events. But the West must also be in close contact with Muslim thinking to understand how to avoid explosion in the Muslim world.
