It weren't us ya Basher...

The title link is to a piece in the Daily News Egypt, reporting on statements made by the Egypt's National Council for Human Rights secretary general. Mukhlis Qutb, the official who made the statement in Egypt's Al-Ahram newspaper, makes some quite big claims that weapons are being smuggled into Gaza from Israel. He goes on to make some even bigger claims that it is IDF members who are among those responsible.

That certain insalubrious Israeli/Israeli-Arab businessmen are involved in dealings with Israel's enemies cannot be ruled out; it would not be the first time (e.g Nahum Manbar). But active IDF servicemen (Qutb does not qualify precisely what he means by 'members'), is hard to believe.

It sounds like another desperate Egyptian statement to extricate itself from the Gazan debacle...

Egypt: hostage to Bedouin volatility?

Egypt, the self-serving peace broker of the Middle East, has wriggled and twisted its way through the Gaza crisis. The noncommittal stance characteristic of the fragile Mubarak regime, has lurched uncomfortably between unconfirmed collaboration with Israel, to criticism verging on condemnation.

Mubarak surely knows that the National Democratic Regime has little credibility in the eyes of the Egyptian populace, so why even bother trying to distance itself from the Egyptian-Israeli connection, made so clear through that poisoned, yet forever iconic photo of Abu al-Gheit shaking hands with Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni. More recently, Mubarak, in the Arab summit held in Doha, Kuwait on the 19th January, stated that Hamas, in refusing to extend the truce which had ended in December, had 'invited' Israeli troops into the coastal enclave.

Egypt's moves on the international stage resemble something akin to Saturday Night Fever, only not so smooth. It was always the end of the conflict that would implicate Egypt as the third lover in the Gaza triangle; with the swift withdrawal of Israeli troops and tanks from from the strip, the cry for Egypt to open its borders is as loud and piercing as ever.

Tunnel of contention

But the issue that has caused the most consternation for peace and security enthusiasts over the past year is that of the smugglers tunnels in the 'Philadelphi corridor', which allegedly run into the thousands figure, that weave up and under the borders like a anachrid's subterranean web.

Israel's aims, stated at the onset of the war, were to eliminate these tunnels, through surveillance and bombardment. A double-pronged attack against both the Hamas fighters and the membrane through which their life-source is filtered, would theoretically strangle this troublesome cell and starve it of its military sustenance.

But a week after a cease fire was unilaterally declared, first, unilaterally by Israel, and then unilaterally by Hamas, the tunnels are still very much in use, causing international spectators to point the finger at Egypt.

For all it's stifling obsession with internal security and acute military presence, the Egypt government either can't, or won't move it's dancing shoes over to Northern Sinai and jiggle back into the West's good books by putting a lid on the tunnels and dismantling the smuggling system on its side of the border.

I find it hard to believe Egyptian friends' protestations that the Egyptian security system simply 'does not know where these tunnels are located'. To agree with such notions would be slighting the great intelligence system that Egypt has built up over decades of dictatorship.

Others give credence to the notion that Egypt does not have an ounce of political will in eliminating the tunnel system, as it is in ideological cahoots with the resistance in Gaza, and is covertly seeking an end to the State of Israel through surreptitious means. As easy and naive as this notion sounds, it is not as absurd as the former; yes, Mubarak and his acolytes hate and fear Hamas with a dread not dissimilar to that of Israel's, but the last thing he wants is a Palestinian exodus into Egyptian territory, potentially strengthening and radicalising the already hefty Muslim Brotherhood and putting an extra strain on the flailing Egyptian economy. In supporting the Hamas resistance within the strip itself, the Phaoronic regime, as it is often referred to by Egyptian opposition, might hope to contain Hamas and channel resentment towards Israel, and away from Egypt.

Bedouin paradise

However, there remains one, very compelling argument that has been suggested as to why Egypt appears so reluctant to act on international pressure and shut up the cross border arms smuggling business. These grounds for Egyptian inaction have less to do with ideological or theological precepts and far more to do with on the ground pragmatic realpolitik inside Egypt.

The 'Bedouin issue' within Egypt is one that has won little media attention outside the travel supplements of foreign newspapers. Indeed, it has had to compete with so much else happening in the Middle East: wars, for example. But despite its relative backwater of a location and its status as a reserve for holiday makers, Sinai is not only a veritable wild-west, but a hotbed for civil unrest.

The Bedouins of Sinai see themselves as different from urbanised Egyptians, both culturally, and ethnically. They also see themselves as persecuted, uprooted from their ancestral dwelling places in the name of vicious state touristic ventures. For many tribes, a traditional and cherished fishing livelihood has been irreversibly damaged by the takeover of coastal areas by real-estate developers and fat-cat tourism companies.

Discriminated and bereft, they feel no compulsion to cooperate with the Egyptian regime, and with the power and innate geographical knowledge they have over this spiritually holy, and strategically vital natural buffer region, the regime cannot afford to incur their wrath further by clamping down on their profiteering.

It is known, though not confirmed, therefore, that it is largely Bedouin traders who are engaged in the underworldly cross-border dealings. It also cannot be ruled out that certain powers that be are taking a cut. If that is the case, it could be said that the regime is indeed 'in cahoots' financially, if not ideologically, with the smuggling business.

Either way, the Bedouin issue is a raw nerve in the Egyptian iron fist. Tempting those profiteering from hostilities away from tunnel life will be a tough, if not an impossible job that will come at a price. Much to the chagrin of Israel, it will not be a price Egypt is willing to pay.

Footing the bill for freedom of expression....it's a risky business

Another Egyptian blogger has been handed down stiff punishment for practicing freedom of expression.

Egyptian blogger, Tamer Mabrouk, who blogs at http://elhakika.blogspot.com, was charged with libel, and given two fines of LE2,500 (around £250) and LE40,000 (£4000) respectively.

He was arrested in July, accused of posting false reports about the Trust Chemicals Company, which operates near the Lake Manzlah and the Suez Canal. Mabrouk not only exposed Trust Chemicals Company as polluters of both Lake Manzlah and the Suez Canal, but wrote of the poor working conditions of the company's Egyptian employees.

According to The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information, an organisation supported by lawyers and researchers, the law suit that was bought against Mabrouk violates article 60 of Egyptian penal law, which states that that the law pertaining to the suit filed against Mabrouk (article 3 of criminal law), is void, as the defendant 'committed' the crime with good intentions. It also ignores the right to freedom of expression.

The company only supplied photocopies of the documents asked for in court and the legality of the text the case relied on is doubtful. Moreover, the lawsuit was filed against the article 3 of the law of criminal procedures with total disregard to article 60 of the penal law which says the law does not cover any act performed with good intentions. This case is a breach of the international covenant of civil and political rights article 19 and the Egyptian constitution article 47, both of which ensure the right to freedom of expression.

The case for freedom of expression, in my (not legal) opinion should not be relevant in this case. However, I respect the opinion of the good lawyers at ANHRI. What should have taken place is a scientific investigation into the Manzlah Lake and the Suez Canal, in addition to workers' rights at the company, to find out if Mabrouk's comments were justified or whether his report was indeed libel. Without such an investigation, the whole case is a farce.

Death of a father

My deep admiration goes out to the Independent's reporter in Gaza journalist and human rights worker Fares Akram, whose father, a former Judge who was both secular and nonpartisan, was killed on the first day of the raids/war.

Akram has had the courage and equanimity, despite his father and cousin's tragic deaths, and fears for the saftey of his pregnant wife, to continue reporting for the Independent.

Human Rights Watch have called upon the IDF to conduct a 'thorough and impartial investigation into their deaths'.

In a letter to Brig. Gen. Avichai Mandelblit, IDF Military Advocate General, HumanRights Watch urged the military to investigate the attack, make the results of the investigation public, and prosecute any persons it finds to have acted in serious violation of international humanitarian law.

On the afternoon of January 3, 2009, an Israeli bomb or missile from an F-16 jet fighter killed the two Gazans at the al-Ghoul farm, northwest of Beit Lahiya and close to Gaza’s border with Israel. Akram al-Ghoul was a judge who worked in the Palestinian Authority courts and resigned after Hamas took over the Gaza Strip in June 2007. He is the father of Fares Akram, Human Rights Watch’s research consultant in Gaza. Mahmoud al-Ghoul, 17, was a student.

So why was this farm targeted? Was it a genuine mistake; the hasty, reckless and impulsive actions of inexperienced and nervous pilot? Akram mentioned in a previous article that his farm is located close to the borders and the Israeli towns beyond, and his family feared that Hamas rockets would fall short and actually hit their farm more than the appearance of Israeli troops. If their land had never been the target of Israeli sorties in the past, why should they be now? Is my previous suggestion of a genuine 'mistake' totally naive? Or should one translate 'mistake' for, 'total devaluation of a Palestinian life'. Akram's father was, to that pilot, 'collatoral damage', reduced to bricks and mortar rather than flesh and blood.

One can only hope that any IDF investigation sheds some light for Akram's family, and that he is as steely and committed in persuing that investigation as he has been in his diligent reporting.

Children are great performing monkeys...

I've been watching al-Jazeera Arabi on and off for the past couple of days. Just now, they are covering a childrens' march in Morocco. In terms of news coverage, this is all very well. I'm a big fan al-Jazeera, but there's something a little disturbing when they bring two kids into the studio, stick them on a chair with a radio mike and tell them what to say.

The two children, a girl and boy aged probably about ten to twelve, were asked by the presenter how they felt about the slaughter in Gaza and the cowardice of the Arab world in not coming to the defence of their brothers. Again, I have no problem with this per se, after all, children have a right to an opinion as adults do. What I do have a problem with, is that these kids were being told exactly what to say, to the point where as a viewer I could hear the producer talking through their ear pieces. Al-Jazeera does not need to stage news, there's enough tragedy going on in the world to keep the viewers fixed, so what's the point of puppeteering these children? Al-Jazeera, please don't squander your professionalism for the sake of sentimental popularity.

Holocaust Psychology

This link to Columnist Daniel Finkelstein's feelings of the current situation provides a very honest and first-hand perspective on Jewish psychology. His historical narrative is slightly skewed, but its a telling piece nevertheless.

دوس على ؛لينك؛ هتلاقي موضوع كاتبها واحد يهودي بريطاني. شخصيا أنا أعتقد إن معلمواته من التاريخ مثلا عن كامب ديفيد مش صحيح - هناك ؛قصص؛ كتيرة عن الي حصل بين برق و عرافات و طبعا لم يكن في ايد عرافات أن يقبل شروط كامب ديفيد من غير ما تقديم حق العودة للفلسطينيين.
بس العامدة مهمة بأن لو انت مش عارف يهودين يمكنك تاخد فكرة عن شعورهم بالوضع الحالي في غزة و ما السبب للاعتداء؟ هو دا الخوف الشديد من محرقة التانية....

Ideology is hard to kick...

Well put, Sune Haugbolle.

The lessons Israel should have learned from the war against Hizbollah in 2006 is that such organisations which rest on social networks cannot be knocked over by bombs. Hamas is not a series of buildings, but an ideology of Islamic resistance that will only be strengthened by a long and bloody fight.