Iran 2005, By Jamil Shawwa

Iran is a strange country in The Middle East. When I say strange, that is strange to the Arabs and from the Arabs. For thousands of years the relationship between the Persians and the Arabs has never been good. They invaded each other, mostly from the part of the Persians before Islam. After Islam arrived and spread all over the current Middle East and parts of Asia and Africa, Iran or Persia became part of the Islamic Empire. Persia contributed to the religion and then created its own sect, Shiite, with people in neighboring Iraq. The Shiites are those who believe that Ali, the cousin of Prophet Muhammad, should have succeeded the prophet as Islam khalifa and not the Prophets’ successor Abu-Bakr Al Sediq. A milestone in the political relations between the Arabs and the Persians came some thousand and so years ago when a famous Persian family known as Al Baramekah became political consultants to Amir Al Momeneen, the ruler, Haroon Al Rashid in Iraq. Al Rashid was the head of the Islamic empire and he employed Al Barameka to be his political advisers. Their influence spread all over and one of them, Jaafer Al Barmaki became Al Rashid Prime Minster. To make the story short, Al Rrashid felt their influence and got information that they were trying to take over the regime, then Al Rshid acted and executed them and by that he expelled the Persian influence from the Arabic political system. I think, since then, the doubts between these two, the Muslim sunnis Arabs, and the Muslim shiites persians became strenuous. In the modern, current, time, the relationship is the same, doubtful and suspicious. Iran during the Shah took over Islands that the United Arab Emirates proclaim as their own and never returned them back to the UAE. Iran under the Islamic Shiite regime continues on this policy. Iraq under Saddam invaded Iran to proclaim the area of Shat al Arab as its area and after 10 years of unexplainable, or explainable war, the situation returned between the two as it was before the war! Iran and the Shiite Arabs created a militant organization in Lebanon by the name of Hezbollah which took on itself to have a quasi army side by side of the Lebanese army. Hezbollah claims that its military wing is there to fight Israel and expels it from all the Lebanese territories. Iran wants, among other things some say, to be to Shiites as Israel was and is to the Jewish people. A Mecca where Shiite can get support and influence. The Arabs Shiite, to a great extent, are proud enough not to accept Iran's influence. However Iran has it's supporters among Shiites in Lebanon and Iraq, a little in Bahrain and maybe among the Shiite in Saudi Arabia. The Arab regimes did not help to cordon the Iranian influence among the Shiite Arabs.They, the regimes, have treated the Shiites as second class citizens and not as true Muslims or at least first class citizens like the rest. Going back few years, or a century, when Khomeini lead the Iranian revolution that ended the regime of Muhammad Reza Pahlavi, the Iranians sent signals that they want to export their revolution, of course, the Iranians are experts in scaring the Arabs, used these tactics to elevate their prestige in the area and to position themselves as the guardian of the Arab Shiite and maybe Islam as they see it. The main influence Iran has at this moment is through two streams, in Lebanon, the Hezbollah organization and in Iraq through Al Sistani, the spiritual leader of the Iraqi Shiite, or at least a big fraction of them. How the relations between these two Muslim powers, the Sunni Muslim and the Shiite Muslim, will evolve is something difficult to predict. But if history gives us any lesson it would be that these powers will not trust each other unless both of them become democratized, and I mean really democratic, and start to cooperate as regular neighboring states and not as two entities trying to have a win-lose situation. As for The relation between the USA and Iran which has also been strange, to say the least, it also could improve if Iran changes it's government format from combative to democratic. The Turkish example could apply to Iran where an Islamic government rules a secular system. The government in Turkey was elected and the people Can in an election oust it and put another party.

Jerusalem 2005

Jerusalem, the holy land , the land of peace, the heart of The Middle East, the heart of the Muslim world, the Jewish world and the Christian world. The capital of the State of Israel and the future capital of the State of Palestine, side by side of the state of Israel. What a city! Basically the whole world, almost, is there. Most people in the world have some sort of a stake in this great city. It is however meant to be under two dominant powers, the Muslims and the Jews. Before 1967, Jerusalem was under the Jordanian power, and then became under the Israeli power who later on annexed it as its capital. There is an Arab population in Jerusalem, Muslims and Christians besides the Jewish people. This city should continue to be open to everyone who wants to visit. I remember when I used to go and eat the knafa at Ja'afer in the old city or when I used to have a delicious piece or two of Riches Pizza and then getting an excellent cup of coffee and Strawberry torte at Max Cafe across the street from the Hamashbir. Having said that, peace will not survive in that area unless the Palestinians are given their share of the city. The Arabs there have the right to have Jerusalem as their capital as Israel does. Both people can administer their respective areas and all people can visit the holy places there. It was in the news that a group of religious Jews tried to go to Al Aqsa mosque area and were confronted by emotional Muslims who felt violated by that visit. The reaction was normal because the Arabs do not have any say in their city and because that part is occupied. If the situation was normal and both the Arabs and the Jews have their share and both rule their areas that situation would not and should not have happened. All religions should be welcomed to visit but not occupy or intimidate the other. If we do not respect the rights of the Jewish, Christians and Muslims people in the holy city, peace will not take place. It's time for all of us to act with civility and not hatred.

The Arab Republics

We talked about the Arab monarchies, now we will address the Arab republics. The Arab Republics are tasting the sweet flavor the monarchs have had for a long time, which is to pass the leadership in their countries to their sons. We saw it happening in Syria and we see signs of it in Libya and Egypt. In a perfectly normal democratic system, it's not abnormal to have the son of a president becoming a president. It happened here in The USA and it's ok to happen anywhere else. The only issue is to have a democratic free system that allows such a transition to happen by the free and transparent choice of the people. The late Syrian president Assad continued to deny until the end that he was giving the presidency to his son while everyone knew that the process was in action and just ready for the declaration. This system is deceiving and of course not democratic. It resembles a thief with the stolen goods trying to deny that he stole anything. The presidents know, maybe, that a free election, probably, will not bring their kids to power, they also might feel jealous from their counterparts the monarchs who can have their kids inherit the power without any fanfare, sort of. The solution is simple: Democracy. Create countries with institutions and elected bodies. Have the three branches of government applying the system of checks and balances. I foresee the French style governing as an example for the Arab republics where you have an elected president and an elected parliament. The head of the wining party in the parliament forms the government. The president governs with the support of his prime minister who is also elected. Neither can do the job in the French example without the support of the other. Personally, I prefer the US system but for some reason I see the French example closer to the Arabic mentality of governing.