Foreign Policy Association Egypt Blog

I am going to be doing some blogging for the Foreign Policy Association's Egypt Blog.

This is the url: http://egypt.foreignpolicyblogs.com/. My first post is titled : Egypt's Exporting of Gas to Israel not Likely to Change.

The Same 20 Questions

If you were an American wandering the streets of Cairo these days, you might be asked the following questions upon meeting Egyptians:

1. Where are you from?
2. What is your religion?
3. What is your name?
4. What do you think of Obama?
5. What do you think of Israel?
6. What do you think of Bush?
7. What do you think about the invasion of Iraq?
8. Can you teach me English?

The Financial Crisis and the GM Bailout

So a friend on campus told me two interesting pieces of news today that I thought you all might like to hear. The first is that he overheard two Egyptians speaking at the US Embassy about how the Jews caused the financial crisis. It must be true, because Hamas thinks so as well. The second is that the Israel lobby is blocking the bailout of GM. Just thought you should know.

Gym Talk - "Obama, Race, and Israel"

I am going to stop numbering my "Gym Talks" because I foresee there will be many more to come.

A couple of guys in the gym asked me today what I thought of Obama. I won’t go through it here but I basically said that I like him although I do not think he is perfect (unlike some other people I know). Anyway, I asked them what they thought. One guy, pointing to his skin, said that Obama being elected was a big deal because brown people in the United States usually cannot be in higher jobs than white people. I explained that although there is racism in the US, we have Black, White, Asian, Arab, etc. presidents of companies, universities, etc. etc. I agreed however that having a Black president is a big deal.

Their biggest complaint about Obama was that they 1. “think that he is going to do things just for the Jews” and 2. “heard that he is biased towards Israel.” One of them mentioned Rahm Emanuel’s appointment in passing. I’ll be honest, the music was really loud, and one guy had a speech impediment, so I didn’t catch everything they were saying. From what I could tell though, they didn’t really go into much detail about their opinion or what they heard. I would venture to guess this is because they don’t really know why they think that Obama is biased towards Israel, and if he is why that might be. These guys are not dumb, but they don’t read The New York Times every day either (that is not a shot at The New York Times, it’s just an example).

I asked what they thought about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in general. They said what I hear most Egyptians say, which is that it will never end. We continued talking and they told me that there are good Israelis and bad Israelis just like there are good Egyptians and bad Egyptians, but that the governments are the ones that cause all of the problems because they say one thing and do another. In addition, they agreed with a two state solution.

I am not sure where the idea about race relations in the US came from, but I sure know where the ideas about Obama came from, because as many people have pointed out, the whole Arab world is distraught over Rahm Emanuel’s appointment. They see it as a death sentence for a Palestinian state. And the majority of news and opinion I hear here completely disregard anything else about Emanuel’s personality, experience, or qualification for the job.

I understand people’s concerns vis-à-vis Emanuel and Israel, but I do not think there is evidence that he is going to be bad for the Arab side. He played an important role at Oslo. And as I have said many times before, just because someone is pro-Israel does not mean that he does not believe in a Palestinian state.

The fixation with everything Israel and Zionist in the Arab media gets really frustrating. I have no problem with reporting on the closure of Gaza or on Israeli raids into the West Bank or whatever. These are things that are happening and they are important to people in this region. But the constant discussion of these issues at the expense of sometimes more important ones and the lack of balance in the sharing of opinions is really tiring.

"Shhhhhhh...Zionism"

My previous post brings me to another point, which is the demonization of the word Zionism. Not just the word, of course, but the concept of the state of Israel as a homeland for the Jewish people. "Zionism is Racism" conferences, Zionism = Apartheid, etc, etc. Most of us have heard it all before. When I broach the topic of religion with Egyptians (which does not happen that often), and especially friends and colleagues in Middle East studies or in my program, we end up talking about Zionism. Let me just give you a quick example. A European friend I met in Egypt, upon finding out what my religion is, literally took a step back and said, "wait, are you a Zionist?"

Opinions in the Classroom

There is a lot of talk about biases, allegiances, expressing opinions, etc. in the academic world, especially in regards to the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Many on the pro-Israel side accuse Middle East studies professors, associations, and students in American and other academic circles as being one-sided, too pro-Palestinian, or anti-Israel. There is a lot of truth to these accusations. However, the issue is not black and white and there are differences between being pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel, less supportive of Israel than your neighbor, anti-Semitic, left-wing, etc. It is not useful to paint everyone with the same brush, nor is it useful to attack people solely because their opinions are different than your own. There are lines, and when these lines are crossed, people should be held accountable. However, for example, people need to understand that just because someone does not support Israel to the same extent as they do, that does not necessarily make that person anti-Israel.

On that note, and the real reason I began writing this post, is because I wanted to share something that happened in the classroom today. I hope to write more on this later, but of course Obama talk is very prevalent at AUC and around Cairo these days, and my professor was asking us if we were happy that Obama was elected. Of course the class was unanimously thrilled. However, one student, who is a very nice woman though she and I disagree on a lot of things, decided to add "yes, but he offered Rahm Emanuel the job of chief of staff, and he is a little too Zionist, so that is not good."

Now, now. We are all entitled to our opinions. However, I was upset by this comment. First of all, I found it ironic that this same woman who was literally jumping up and down with excitement the day of the election in anticipation of Obama's win, who did not come to school the day after because she stayed up all night watching the results, who told me that anyone who would vote for McCain is "retarded," is already criticizing Obama's decision making skills. I thought he was supposed to be perfect? I support Obama, but I was never under the illusion (or delusion) that he is perfect or that once he was elected, all of America's problems were going to just disappear into thin air.

More importantly, the discussion of Rahm Emanuel's politics, history regarding Israel, his father, etc, and being upset about these things I have no problem with. However, to me, the comment made in class served no purpose and was out of context of the discussion, unnecessary, and inciting. Personally, I try not make comments that I think could be inciting or might offend other people even if such a sentiment might be warranted based on my opinion. Especially in a classroom, especially when we are not really talking about politics, and especially when I know there are other people around who might disagree with it and/or find it offensive.

Not to mention the fact the Emanuel is the fourth ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives, and by that logic is qualified for the job. Israel is not the only issue he will be dealing with and hence should not be qualified or disqualified for the job solely based on that criteria.

Anyway, these are the types of comments I hear often in Middle East studies academic circles.

Al-Jazeera and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

I just had a nice conversation with a cab driver which started somehow with us discussing TV and how most TV programs and channels are a waste of time. I listed a few that were good, however, like History Channel, Discovery Channel, and yes, HBO. I mentioned that news programs were generally good as well, as long as they were mostly news. He then said to me, "can I ask you a personal question, and if you don't mind, could you answer me honestly?" I said sure, of course.

He asked what I thought of Al-Jazeera's coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I gave him my usual spiel, and noted that what I object to about Al-Jazeera in this regard is that they give mostly favorable coverage to the Palestinian side and have mostly stories covering the plight of the Palestinians, while ignoring those Palestinians and Palestinian groups which commit wanton acts of violence, terrorism, and are actively trying to stop any peace process. In addition, I think Al-Jazeera only covers Israeli news which relates to the conflict, and if it is supposed to be a "Middle East focused" news station, it should treat Israel in this regard like it does all other countries in the Middle East.

In any case, he told me that I have to see Al-Jazeera's coverage of the conflict in a context of occupation and resistance. This of course is a prevailing notion here among others explaining causation for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which I agree is part of the issue but not all of it. I told him that in that context I understand, from the Palestinian side, that when someone kills an Israeli soldier in the West Bank, that is seen as "resistance." Fine. Obviously, I am very upset when that happens, but if you are going to try to understand the other side, this is a point of view which can be backed up by logical arguments about occupation and resistance. However, I explained, when Palestinians shoot rockets from Gaza into Israel proper, or when suicide bombers blow themselves up on buses or gunman shoot students in schools, this is not resistance. This is terrorism. And when Al-Jazeera does not make that clear, and calls the people who commit these acts "martyrs," that is completely unacceptable.

At that point I was ready to get out, and he either did not have a response or had had enough. Regardless, it was a very friendly conversation, and we both parted with smiles on our faces.

Clinton, Monica, and Israel

I have a lot of things I still need to post and a lot of work to do, but I have to write this down while it is still fresh in my mind.

We are reading a book in class called Taxi, by Khaled Khamisi. Khamisi recorded his conversations with taxi drivers in Egypt over the span of about two years and compiled them into short stories in this book. It is very interesting and fun to read. Depending on how tired I am and how confident I am feeling with my Arabic, I like to talk with taxi drivers, too, as they really get around Cairo and usually have a lot to say. Sometimes I think I should write my own version of Taxi.

This conversation started with the usual pleasantries and when I told the driver, Ahmed, that I was from America, he was very happy and said "ah, Bush, Bush." I asked him whether he likes Obama or McCain, as Bush's term is almost up. He told me he liked Clinton. I asked him why, and he said because he was a good guy. I reminded him of what happened with Monica Lewinsky and he told me that it wasn't Clinton's fault. "What would you do if there was an attractive woman dressing and acting that way in front of you?" Anyway, he said, Israel put her in the White House to sabotage Clinton and his administration. I asked him to explain, and he said that the White House and American businesses are controlled by Israel. "People think that the US controls Israel, but it is actually Israel that controls the US," he said. He told me that because Clinton was not kowtowing to Israel enough they brought him down, and that Bush is not good because he is controlled by Israel.

Ahmed actually mentioned that Israel and the Jews control the White House and America's economy, which is important to note. Many people here do not make a distinction between Israelis and Jews. However, Ahmed also told me that no matter what you are, Christian, Jew, or Muslim, as long as you are a "just" person, he doesn't have a problem.

When I pressed him on who he likes in November, he said McCain, because he is a good guy. He didn't seem to have any interest in Obama.

Shots in Jerusalem

One of the many things I love about Israel is that you can go to a bar in Jerusalem on a Sunday night, have a drink with a yarmulke wearing Israeli, and get a shot on the house from a bartender who cheerses to "shana tova."

Gym-talk

I had another interesting conversation in the Weider Gym today with the Captain and some of his friends. I had been trying to hide my water-drinking from them out of respect for the Muslim Holy Month of Ramadan, which began last Monday, and during which Muslims fast during the day, among other things.

I asked the Captain and his friends how they are able to lift weights without drinking any water, and he responded by saying "because Islam is strong." "Good answer," I thought to myself. They then preceded to speak in Arabic (Egyptian dialect, or "amiyya" to be exact) which I am supposed to be able to understand, but since these guys are not the most educated of sorts their Arabic is hard to comprehend, especially when they are speaking fast, and not to me. I picked up that they were continuing their discussion of the topic and I heard "American" and "Israel" in the mix. I asked what they were discussing and one of them responded by asking "Why is America always with Israel (these are loose translations, mind you)?" I responded by saying (and yes this is not a direct answer) by saying that America is with Israel just like it is with the Palestinians and other Arabs (and yes, there is a difference, but you will see where I took it in a minute). I said that the US gives Israel money, yes, but it gives Palestinians and other Arab countries like Egypt plenty of money as well. And I did not even go into the Saudi thing.

The Captain's friend said that the Egyptian people do not see any of this money, and that they don't need it and don't want it. There wasn't much I can say to this because frankly, he was right. I asked him, "whose fault is it that Egyptians don't see any of this money? Isn't it because of the Egyptian government?" He responded yes, and because of America, too. Fair enough.

I asked the Captain that if the Israelis and Palestinians make an agreement that they both think is fair, would that be acceptable in his opinion? He pretty much said that the problem will never end and it will never be acceptable, and that Israel really has to go. I asked him why Israel has to go. He said "Do you like blood?" I responded "no," and he said "then Israel has to go." That doesn't make much sense to me.

The conversation continued with another gym goer who told me that one of the problems with Israel is that it was built on a Palestinian state. Yes, he used the term "dawla," so in my mind that means "state." I corrected by telling him that there has never been a Palestinian state and that the Palestinians historically considered themselves to be part of what was called "Greater Syria," which includes what is now Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and the Palestinian Territories. For the record, this to me does not mean that Palestinians are not a unique people with a shared identity and do not deserve to have a state. However, Palestinian Arab nationalism is a relatively new concept and should not be treated as if it has been around since the beginning of time. So I understand his argument (and have heard it before and I think that it is a valid one,. Yes, there were Arab Palestinians living in what is now Israel and the Territories before Israel was created, and yes, there were more of them living there than there were Jews) but I reminded him that the UN did vote to create a State of Israel and a Palestinian state (which the Arabs, as a whole, rejected) and that although the situation was unfortunate for the Palestinians and should be reconciled in some way, no one is ever going to be 100% pleased.

I asked him who was in Egypt before the Muslims and the Arabs, and he said with a smile, "the Ancient Egyptians," and I added "and the Copts (who are still here and who have had some issues, to say the least, with the Muslim population. A movie called "Hassan and Marqos starring two of the most famous Egyptian actors, Omar Shariff and Adel Imam, talks about Christian-Muslim tensions in Egypt). After that, he turned around and said "who started this discussion anyway?" and walked away, which I thought was funny. Actually, he said literally in Arabic "who opened this topic?"

So there is me engaging with Egyptians on salient political issues.