• Wasting Time with Musharraf 
• Let's Move On 
• Roots of Rationality 
• Unity Give Iran New Confidence 
• State of Chutzpah 
• MIR Blog 
• Letters 
• About Us
• We'd Love to Hear From You!

By Jamal Dajani

Five years ago, President George W. Bush promised to "liberate" the people of Afghanistan, "smoke out" bin Laden and finish off the Taliban in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The President followed through on his promise by invading Afghanistan, but Al Qaeda and the Taliban would escape into neighboring Pakistan and set up new command centers far from America's reach.

Last week, President Bush hosted an Iftar diner at the White House in honor of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and Afghan President Hamid Karzai. To the outside world, the meeting seemed to be a success, and Mr. Bush praised both Musharraf and Karzai as "two courageous leaders" who are working to defeat the forces of terrorism and extremism.  In reality, the US President had to intervene when his guests clashed at the dinner table. Karzai alleged that OBL and Mullah Omar were in Pakistan and Musharraf had turned a blind eye toward them. This enraged Musharraf, who on several occasions accused Karzai of being weak and unaware of the security situation in his own country, comparing him to an ostrich.

Recently, a declassified US intelligence report, pointed to the conflict in Iraq as the "cause celebre" for jihadists throughout the Muslim world and also questioned whether the US was winning its global "war on terror."

The declassified excerpts from the report made no mention of Afghanistan, where the war against Al-Qaeda began five years ago, and where the Taliban have rebounded in parts of the country and reconstruction efforts have virtually stopped. The alliance between Bush, Musharraf and Karzai has been nothing short of a failure due to the fact that the main  players in the region, Hamid Karzai and Pervez Musharraf, have deep mistrust in each other.

After 9/11, President Musharraf pledged his country's support to America's fight against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, but he has struggled to control his own military and intelligence services, which have for many years supplied money and weapons to various radical groups in Afghanistan. Regardless, the border area where the Taliban and Al-Qaeda members are thought to have taken refuge  is inherently difficult to control because of terrain and fierce autonomy claimed by local leaders.

"We used to call them the no-go areas," says Governor Ali Muhammad Orakzai, the Pakistani political chief of the tribal areas. According to Orakzai and many familiar with the Afghan Pakistan border areas, when the Pakistani army is fighting the Taliban, they are fighting brethren and cousins.

US officials say that today the border region is a key front of the global war on terror and many analysts believe that the entire leadership of both the Taliban and Al-Qaeda is hiding in these tribal areas. So why is the hunt for Osama bin Laden, Ayman al- Zawahiri and Mullah Omar in this region practically non-existent?

In 2004, after prodding from the United States, Pakistan launched a major military offensive against the camps of tribal militias harboring Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters in the Waziristan provinces. But the offensive failed and the Pakistani government's negotiations with the tribal leaders led to the Sargodha peace pact in February 2005; in effect, creating a de facto sanctuary for Al-Qaeda.

Loosing patience with Musharraf, the U.S. military began targeting Al-Qaeda members using unmanned Predator aircrafts equipped with Hellfire missiles. In 2005, when Hayat Ullah Khan, a local Pakistani journalist  took photographs showing that a U.S. missile had been used to kill an Al-Qaeda operative and contradicting the Pakistani's military's account of his death, within days he was seized by unknown assailants and his body was later found on a remote roadside. His family insists that the Pakistani military is responsible for his death, something vehemently denied by Musharraf.

The number of attacks in Afghanistan by the Taliban and Al-Qaeda has increased dramatically in 2006 and what is significant is that the attackers have been targeting the capital Kabul. Two suicide attacks rocked Kabul in September, underscoring the rising danger in the once-calm capital as militants step up attacks across the country.

Is this due to capitulation by President Musharraf for allowing the border region of Pakistan to become a safe haven for the Taliban and Al-Qaeda? A  maneuver, some would say, to save face in front of his military, which had lost upwards of 800 of its troops fighting in the tribal region and was by in large sympathetic to both outlawed organizations.

Perhaps the most telling element about Musharraf's precarious position in getting his country caught in the battle of the "war on terror" is his remarkable comment on a recent television interview when he claimed that former U.S. deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage had threatened to bomb Pakistan back to "stone age" if Pakistan did not cooperate with the U.S. shortly after the events of 9/11 in its hunt for Osama bin Laden. This would seem to indicate a man under extreme pressure, no longer willing to risk his life and presidency to appease the U.S. and the question remains: how long will Musharraf be allowed to play both sides of the equation?

by Souheila Al Jadda
The Daily Star

The recent speech in which Pope Benedict XVI quoted a 13th-century Christian emperor's defamatory remarks about Islam could not have come at a more difficult time. It came only a few days after the fifth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks, a month after the end of the Israel-Lebanon war, and less than two weeks before the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.

 Further, many Muslims throughout the world see the "war on terrorism" as a "war on Islam" and on Muslims. Unfortunately, the pope's statement reinforces this false perception. In his speech, Benedict quoted the Byzantine Emperor Manual II Paleologus as saying: "Show me just what Mohammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." Statements like these have the potential to spark international outrage, much like what we saw this past spring, when Muslims throughout the world angrily demonstrated against cartoons published in a Danish newspaper defaming the Prophet Mohammad.

It is reasonable to highlight theological differences between two religions for intellectual discourse. This should be encouraged, especially between Muslims and Christians. But the Pope's speech was not about the differences between Islam and Christianity. This made many Muslims wonder why the quote and other similar comments were used in the first place, since it seemed out of context and blatantly maligned Islam and its prophet.

Read More

By Tariq Ramadan
Guardian

A few sentences spoken by Pope Benedict XVI were sufficient to touch off a firestorm of impassioned reaction. Throughout the Muslim world religious leaders, presidents, politicians and intellectuals joined their voices to protesting masses angered by a perceived "insult" to their faith. Most did not read the Pope's speech; others had relied on a sketchy summary according to which the Pope had linked Islam and violence. But all railed against what they saw as an "intolerable offence".

Whatever the judgments of these scholars and intellectuals, one would have hoped that they would adopt a more reasoned approach in their critical remarks, for two reasons. First, the unquestionable sincere love and reverence Muslims have for Prophet Muhammad notwithstanding, we are well aware how certain groups or governments manipulate crises of this kind as a safety valve for both their restive populations and their own political agenda.

When the people are deprived of their basic rights and of their freedom of expression, it costs nothing to allow them to vent their anger, be it over Danish cartoons or the words of the Pontiff. Secondly, what we are witnessing is, in fact, mass protest characterised primarily by uncontrollable outpouring of emotion which in the process ends up providing a living proof that Muslims cannot engage in reasonable debate and that verbal aggression and violence are more the rule than the exception. Muslim intellectuals bear the primary responsibility of not lending credibility to this counter-productive game.

Read More 

By Mahan Abedin

Iran's emergence as the predominant indigenous power in the Middle East is often attributed to recent geopolitical changes in the region, in particular the downfall of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. The importance of external events notwithstanding, new internal dynamics are an equally important dimension to Iran's growing geo-political weight. The sudden rise of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the emergence of a more homogenous political elite in Tehran is unprecedented in the 27 year history of the post-revolutionary Iranian state. In little over a year Ahmadinejad has consolidated his power at home and is fast emerging as an important player in the global stage, as evidenced by his trip to Venezuela and the deepening relationship with Hugo Chavez. While internal unity is clearly reinforcing Iran's growing clout in the region and beyond, the long-term impact of this growing homogeneity on the country's political development is not so clear. It is more than likely that the changes of the past 12 months and the emergence of a more "Presidential" system will have a lasting effect on the fundamental features of Iran's unusual political system. Often presented as a lackey of the clerical establishment, Ahmadinejad may yet end up being the bane of the same establishment. Revolutionary Iran: fragmented from the outset Understanding the rise of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the political unity which he has engendered requires a deep understanding of the intricate factional politics of the Islamic Republic.

By Uri Avnery

IN EVERY language there are some words that cannot be properly translated into any other. It seems that they express something intimately connected with the speakers of that language and rooted in their history, traditions and reality. Such words become international expressions, appearing in other languages in their original form.

For example, the German word "Schadenfreude". Or the English word "gentleman" and the American word 'business". Or the Russian word "pogrom" (originally meaning devastation). Or the Japanese word "kamikaze" (divine wind, the title given to suicide bombers). Or the Mexican "manana" and the similar Arabic "bukra" (both meaning tomorrow. The difference between them? The joke says: Bukra is not so urgent.) And, lately, the Palestinian "intifada".
The most prominent Hebrew addition to this international lexicon is "chutzpah", a word that has no equivalent in any other language. Some English words may come close (impertinence, cheek, insolence, impudence), but none conveys the full meaning of this Hebrew-Yiddish expression. It seems that it reflects something that is especially characteristic of Jewish reality, which was transferred to the State of Israel, which defines itself as a "Jewish State".

THE PRESIDENT of Israel is supposed to symbolize the common denominator of all our citizens. Therefore it is proper for him to symbolize this trait, too.
And indeed, it is difficult to imagine a more quintessential chutzpah than the behavior of His Excellency, President Moshe Katzav. He is the supreme symbol of Israeli chutzpah. Katzav has been accused of the sexual harassment of several women who worked for him in the President's office, as well as in his earlier public offices. At least three of them accused him of rape.

Read More

The Mosaic Intelligence Report brings you the most important news and views from the Middle East. An offshoot of Link TV's Peabody Award-winning "Mosaic: World News from the Middle East," a daily compilation of translated television news reports from throughout the Arab world, MIR highlights issues and events that you don't see in mainstream Western media.

The Mosaic Intelligence Report recently launched a daily blog, which offers Mosaic video and news, links to staff articles and a forum for readers and Middle East experts to share their opinions and perspectives on the current crisis.

Join the bloggers and share your constructive insight here.

Visit the MIR Blog 
Or Watch The Latest Mosaic Intelligence Report Video

Dear Sir,
You claim our media is the Washington Press corp, but I get my news from all over the world through internet news sources including yours, and guess what? Arabs are the only ones siding for Hezbollah. The other 75% of the world think Hezbollah are barbarians. Of course we don't want to see any one killed, especially childeren, but Lebanon allowed it to happen.Hezbollah started the offensive because they were ready to defend themselves in battle. They planned on this battle and executed it. The consequences of their actions to the civilian population of Lebanon should be seen as "deserved". This is what happens when you allow a terrorist organization to run your country. Israel did what it needed to, but of course were unprepared. I'm sure they would have done things differently now. Just the same, don't expect to defy the world and start a war based on race, without getting your people killed in the process.As far as I'm concerned, if you allow "Resistance Movements" to run your country and speak for you, you get what you deserve.
Ron A. Romero

To the Editor,
For some reason, I cannot stop thinking about the problems in the Middle East, in particular the Israeli Government's actions. I have no connection to Jews or Arabs, but it seems obvious to me that Israel is the bad guy in all of this. The Israeli govt. attacks the Palestinian people with the full war machine supplied to them by the US, and then claims self defense when they shoot children throwing rocks at tanks. One way of ensuring continuing violence between groups is to harm each other's children.
Israel has mastered this atrocity. I also find it ironic that Israel can demand that Hezbollah (Lebanon) submit to UN resolution 1555 while completely ignoring UN resolutions aimed at Israel. A hypocrite does not earn or deserves respect. Look at Bush.Lastly, I used to watch Al Minar TV to peek at the opinions of 'the other side'. But Bush & his Israeli friends have decided that they must 'protect' US from such ideas. Sound familiar?Please keep doing the good work. These are difficult times for the 'TRUTH'. Thank you for providing the opportunity for expression. We used to cherish that in America.
Mike Baker

Dear Sir,
When I read your Mosaic emails, I am usually appalled at how
one-sided they show our U.S. news reporting to be.  I wonder, though,
if that one-sidedness isn't our own bloody fault.  The news media are
only our "watch dogs" if we FORCE them to be. (Gone, apparently, are
the heroic investigative bloodhounds of the Watergate era.)  And too
few of us seem to be demanding hard-nosed, critical reporting these
days. Look at all the folks who are glued to the tube when a JonBenet
Ramsey-type kerfuffle occurs -- to the exclusion of the really
important news events going on during the entire run of the
scandal-du-jour. At least I know where I can get "other opinions," and Mosaic is at
the top of that list.  Many thanks!
Elizabeth W.

To the Editor,
I go online to view Middle Eastern news on Mosaic news, however, I must say that much of the news is very biased.  The Doha broadcast is interesting for its use of terms like "Israeli assassins."  This is a highly loaded phrase.  One could counter with "Lebanese assassins" but that would be biased.  Perhaps, one day something somewhere will be unbiased.  Remember, Israel only wants to protect its borders but every major Middle Eastern government has stated its intention to wipe out Israel.  In the face of this insanity, Israel must make hard decisions.
Deb Aubespin,

Dear Editor,
I found Mosaic News on LINK TV months ago and have not stopped watching it.  I cannot believe the difference in your reporting of Middle Eastern affairs compared to the US news reports.  I have long given up on watching US mainstream media news.  It's painfully obvious that it is packed with propaganda and always takes the side of Israel/US showing only their perspective.  I was horrified the first time I saw news from Palestine and from Iraq at what's being done with the blessings and participation of my government.  I've been working for truth and peace ever since.
Thank you for opening my eyes, mind and heart.
Jamie Kelly

Disclaimer: Mosaic Intelligence Report will put up as many of your comments as possible but we cannot guarantee that all e-mails will be published. MIR reserves the right to edit comments that are published.

The Mosaic Intelligence Report (MIR) is a periodical newsletter which will bring you the most important news and views from the Middle East. Relying on Mosaic broadcasts and Middle Eastern press, MIR will highlight issues and events that you don't see in mainstream Western media.

Mosaic: World News from the Middle East features selections from daily TV news programs produced by national broadcasters throughout the Middle East. The news reports are presented unedited and translated, when necessary, into English.
 
Mosaic includes television news broadcasts from selected national and regional entities. Some of the broadcasters are state controlled and others are private networks, often affiliated with political factions. These news reports are regularly watched by 280 million people in 22 countries all over the Middle East.

Mosaic is supported by various grants, foundations and viewers like you. Mosaic is broadcast on Link TV. Link TV broadcasts programs that engage, educate and activate viewers to become involved in the world. These programs provide a unique perspective on international news, current events, and diverse cultures, presenting issues not often covered in the U.S. media. Link TV connects American viewers with people at the heart of breaking events, organizations in the forefront of social change and the cultures of an increasingly global community.

Send Your Comments to mosaicnews@linktv.org

or write to:

Jamal Dajani
Director of Middle Eastern Programming
PO Box 2008
San Francisco, CA 94126-2008