CHICAGO,IL–Eboo Patel discussed various interpretations for the meaning of the word “home” during a recent book reading and discussion at College of DuPage. A former College of DuPage student, Patel read from his book “Acts of Faith: The Story of an American Muslim,” which is both an exploration of faith and a personal story about his own struggle against racial intolerance. Patel served on President Barack Obama’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based Partnerships and founded the Interfaith Youth Core, which promotes mutual respect and religious pluralism. His appearance was part of the Writers Read series at College of DuPage.

13-5

By Nilofar Suhrawardy, MMNS India Correspondent

NEW DELHI: With saffron brigade hitting headlines for alleged involvement of several members associated with this right-winged, extremist organization for a series of terrorist incidents, politicians are trying their best to politicize the issue. This trend has picked up greater heat following “confessions” of Swami Aseemanand about his and his accomplices’ role in Malegaon, Samjhauta Express, Ajmer and Mecca Masjid blasts. It may be recalled that earlier Muslims were arrested and external elements blamed for these incidents. Politicians keen on polishing their “secular” image are wasting little time in clarifying their stand against the saffron brigade. Some are also questioning the false charges filed against Muslims.

Asserting that he had blamed the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) earlier too for their role in spreading terrorism, Congress general secretary Digvijay Singh said: “All my critics should understand that whatever I had said about the involvement of the members of the Sangh Pariwar (saffron brigade) has been proved to be correct.” Clarifying that his stand against saffron brigade was not against Hindus and that such an impression had been falsely spread, he said: “I am a Hindu and my wife and kids are all Hindus, so it would be wrong to say that I will ever be against Hindus.”

The Left bloc is using the opportunity to attack the saffron brigade for the terrorist incidents and the government for having earlier blamed Muslims for these. Swami Aseemanand’s “confession,” according to Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) member Brinda Karat, has “exposed the diabolical role” of “Hindutva” groups in these terrorist operations. Karat has addressed a letter to Home Minister P. Chidambaram regarding this. She pointed out: “The earlier investigations, the public statements of agencies wrongly accusing the Muslim youth of the bomb blasts, their torture and incarceration have brought no credit to the investigations or for that matter to the government which appeared to have gone along with the speculative theories floated by the investigating agencies.” Demanding justice and compensation for those who were falsely accused, Karat said: “At least now justice must be done to those falsely accused. Those still in jail should be released without any delay in these specific cases. The central government must also give them compensation and ensure their rehabilitation.”

The central government is considering measures to help Muslims who were “arrested wrongly” in terrorist attacks, which the members linked with saffron brigade are strongly suspected to be responsible for. “The Government of India will do whatever possible for rehabilitation of the (Muslim) youth and for the relief of their families,” a source said. A proposal to provide financial, legal and other help to the Muslim youths, who were earlier held for long periods as “terrorists” but were later found innocent, is being considered.

Meanwhile, Swami Aseemanand’s confession has provided substantial ground to Indian Muslims to express their stand against saffron brigade and demand just treatment of Muslims still held as “terrorists” without any evidence against them. Several Muslim organizations gathered at Mumbai’s Azad Maidan (January 20) to voice their demands. Describing RSS and Abhinav Bharat as “fascist organizations,” they demanded a ban on them. “These organizations are the root cause of hatred and enmity between people in the nation,” they said in a press release. They also demanded “unconditional release of Muslim youths who are still behind bars” in connection with the Mecca Masjid, Ajmer Sharif and Samjhauta Express blasts, and “impartial investigation” into the murder of Sunil Joshi, RSS pracharak. Joshi was suspected to be working for Swami Aseemanand.

Blaming investigating agencies for having deliberately arrested Muslims, without any evidence against them, Maulana Azhari of Malegaon said: “If there is a blast in a mosque and Muslims are killed, even a common man will tell you that it cannot be the job of a Muslim. Investigating agencies have deliberately twisted investigations and trapped Muslim youths. Strict inquiry and action is needed against the RSS and erring investigators. A blast is a blot on the nation.”

Soon after Swami Aseemanand’s confession about his involvement in Malegaon blast, the nine accused for the same applied for bail. Advocate Khalid Azmi moved their bail applications before the special Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, which are expected to be heard on January 28. Elaborating on this, Azmi said: “Aseemanand’s confession was the main ground for seeking bail. The application also refers to the reply filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation in the Bombay High Court that they had no direct evidence (against the accused).” Besides, Azmi referred to Swami Aseemanand making confession after arrest of Sadhvi Pragnya Singh Thakur and Lt. Col. Prasad Shrikant Purohit in Malegaon 2008 blast. “This clearly shows that these nine accused are innocent and that they have been framed. Therefore, I filed the bail plea,” Azmi said. The nine Muslims, whose bail pleas have been filed by Azmi, are: Salman Farsi, Shabir Ahmed, Noorulhuda Doha, Rais Ahmed, Mohammed Ali, Asif Khan, Javed Sheikh, Farooque Ansari and Abrar Ahmed.

While politicians are trying their best to use Swami Aseemanand’s confession for justifying their stand against saffron brigade, the Muslim organizations have become more assertive and vocal on protesting against their being falsely linked with terrorist incidents. It is to be watched whether the erring authorities are punished, the wrongly held Muslims are released and given compensation as well as what action is taken against extremist organizations with which “terrorists” like Swami Aseemanand are linked!

13-5

By Sumayyah Meehan, MMNS Middle East Correspondent

By definition, self-immolation means, “A deliberate and willing sacrifice of oneself, often by fire.” For many who choose this form of almost certain suicide, the reasons for the deed are vast and the intention is to draw attention to their plight or the plight of their family or people. A recent spate of self-immolations has spread across the Middle East at an alarming rate, leaving authorities baffled as to how to prevent even more copycat cases.

It all started in Tunisia, just prior to the New Year. Aggravated and fed up with years of abuse from Tunisian authorities, who routinely hassled him and sought to damage his fruit business in countless ways, Tunisian citizen Mohammed Bouazizi took matters into his own hands. He took his cart to a local governmental building and parked it right in front. He climbed atop his fruit cart, doused himself with gasoline and set himself alight. Bouazizi was burned beyond recognition although his family members could recognize his voice. He succumbed to his injuries and died a few days later.

Bouazizi’s death aroused the Tunisian people to protest in the streets over the lack of basic human rights in the country and governmental corruption. The protest forced Tunisian President Zine Al Abidine Ben Ali to resign and flee to neighboring Saudi Arabia for safe haven. The victory of the Tunisian people, ignited by Bouazizi’s suicide, seems to have worked like a charm to create change in Tunisia. At least that is the message that people in neighboring Arab states are getting. As a result, unprecedented numbers of people in the Middle East have chosen to set themselves on fire to create change in their countries similar to that of Tunisia.

In Egypt, at least six people have set themselves on fire to protest their government’s policies. Another seven people have set themselves alight in Algeria and the first case of self-immolation has been recorded in Saudi Arabia. Morocco and Mauritania have also reported at least one case of self-immolation. Not all of the people who have set themselves on fire have died, but the majority has been burned beyond recognition. Bouazizi is being touted as a martyr and his deeds an effective means to an end.

What is most surprising is that all of the self-immolations have occurred in predominantly Muslim lands and many were by Muslims. Suicide, in any form, is strictly prohibited in Islam. And there is a great reward for Muslims who bear tyrant rulers with patience and trust in God Almighty. However, burgeoning inflation and hopelessness due to lack of education or job opportunities in many parts of the region, are adding fuel to the flames of an increasingly combustible situation.

For this reason, Egypt’s Al-Azhar University in Cairo issued a statement this past week reiterating that suicide (especially for political purposes) is forbidden in Islam according to the Shari’ah. Egyptian authorities also instructed all mosques in the country to make the prohibition of suicide in Islam the feature topic of this past Friday’s khutbah, or sermon. Similar statements have been shared in mosques across the Middle East.

In the interim, countries across the region are on high alert for similar self-immolations as the unrest in Tunisia continues and Bouazizi’s deed lives on in the hearts and minds of people willing to sacrifice their very lives for the sake of change.

13-5

By Suhail Khan

Editor’s note:  Opinions of Mr. Suhail Khan are his own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of TMO.

The relationship of Muslim Americans, the GOP & the Tea Party Movement has been a stormy one, but now more than ever, engagement is key.

This summer, the controversy surrounding the Islamic Center in Lower Manhattan amplified a rough-and-tumble national conversation about Islam, Muslims, and America. And while I’m confident that the nation’s 6-8 million Muslim Americans are increasingly regarded as loyal, valuable, and contributing citizens by their fellow Americans, there’s no doubt the debate has also involved harsh and ugly rhetoric, heartache, and even violence. 

Worse still, this discussion has become entwined in a broader–and often nastier–partisan food-fight. Despite President George W. Bush’s best efforts post-9/11 to separate terrorism from the faith of Islam, a seemingly endless chorus of conservative commentators has failed to make any such distinction. The conservative magazine National Review fired Ann Coulter, for example, when she wrote of Muslims, “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.” In 2007, after Bush made a statement underscoring Islam’s place alongside Christianity and Judaism in the Abrahamic religious tradition, columnist Cal Thomas asked, “How can the president say that we all worship the same God when Muslims deny the divinity of Jesus?”

And these increasingly hostile attitudes are often reflected in the comments of current and former elected officials as well. Colorado Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo suggested in 2005 that the U.S. response to terrorism should be to bomb Muslim holy cities including Mecca. In 2006, Virginia Republican Rep. Virgil Goode complained that the election of Muslim Americans such as Minnesota Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison underscored the need for immigration reform (despite the fact that Ellison was born in Detroit to Roman Catholic parents). When the House of Representatives passed a resolution honoring Ramadan in 2007, 42 Republican congressmen declined to vote in favor of it, instead voting “present.”

During the 2008 presidential campaign, harsh statements about “Muslims” and “Arabs” were commonplace. Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain eventually rejected the support of an influential evangelical pastor, Rod Parsley, in Ohio after he urged Christians to wage a “war” against the “false religion” of Islam. When asked whether he would appoint a Muslim American in his cabinet, Republican candidate and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney replied that he “cannot see that a cabinet position would be justified” based on the percentage of Muslims in the country.

And after the so-called “Ground Zero mosque” controversy erupted this summer, anti-Muslim rhetoric hit a fevered pitch. Candidates such as New York Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio blasted the mosque’s “terrorist-sympathizing” imam (Lazio lost eventually the primary) while political pundits such as Newt Gingrich made statements equating Islam with Nazism.

Not surprisingly, the partisan divide on Islam and Muslims is reflected in popular opinion polls. In a recent Zogby survey of American attitudes on a broad array of issues, stark differences emerged between Democrats and Republicans in their respective views on Arabs and Muslims. When asked about their attitudes towards Arabs, for example, 57 percent of Democrats responded “favorable” and 30 percent responded “unfavorable.” On the Republican side, 28 percent responded “favorable” while 66 percent responded “unfavorable.”

When asked about their attitudes towards Muslims, Democrats were 54 percent “favorable,” 34 percent “unfavorable”; Republicans were 12 percent “favorable,” 85 percent “unfavorable.” The poll’s other findings were just as troubling. When asked “Is Islam a religion of peace?” – 62 percent of Democrats said it was while 79 percent of Republicans say it was not.

And when Americans were asked in separate questions whether they “know enough about Islam and Muslims (or Arab countries and people) or need to know more”, among Democrats, 68 percent say they would “like to know more” about Islam, with 80 percent wanting “to know more” about the Arab World. Among Republicans, 71 percent and 58 percent said they “know enough” and “don’t want to learn more,” respectively.

This partisan divide wasn’t always the case. Muslim Americans voted two-to-one for George H.W. Bush in 1992. And while they supported Bill Clinton by the same margin in 1996, the majority of Muslim American voters supported George W. Bush in the 2000 presidential election. And regardless of arguments after-the-fact, Bush earned this support. As early as 1999, the then-Texas governor met with several Muslim community leaders and made a visit to an Islamic center in Michigan — the first and only major presidential candidate to do so. The 2000 Republican convention in Philadelphia was the first in either national party’s history to include a Muslim prayer. On the campaign trail, Bush praised Americans of faith who regularly attend a “church, synagogue, or mosque.” And after Muslim civil rights leaders expressed their concerns over the use of “secret evidence” by the Clinton Justice Department, Bush criticized such abuses in a presidential debate with Vice President Al Gore.

Bush’s unprecedented outreach (and by contrast Gore’s lackadaisical effort) paid-off. Eight major Muslim American organizations endorsed Bush, and he won more than 70 percent of the Muslim vote, including 46,200 ballots in Florida alone, prompting one prominent conservative leader to write “Bush was elected President of the United States of America because of the Muslim vote.”

The 9/11 tragedy, of course, changed everything. But as stated, in the early days after the terrorist attacks, it was Bush who reminded Americans, “Ours is a war not against a religion, not against the Muslim faith…. [O]urs is a war against individuals who absolutely hate what America stands for.” He met with Muslim American leaders on numerous occasions, becoming the only sitting president to visit an American mosque (which he visited on two occasions), and appointed Muslim Americans to several prominent positions in his administration.

Nor was Bush the only Republican politician to distinguish the war against extremist terrorism from Islam itself. House Speaker Denny Hastert, Republican National Committee Chairman Jim Nicholson, and National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Davis joined Bush in supporting the issuance of a postage stamp honoring Eid, the Muslim holiday, in 2001.

But as Bush’s first term unfolded, post-9/11 unity gave way to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal; and the same Muslim groups that raised concerns of violations of civil liberties under the Clinton administration were predictably upset over the Patriot Act and the Bush administration’s detainment and warrantless wiretapping policies. In the 2004 election, more than half of Muslim voters supported Democrat John Kerry and Independent Ralph Nader.

By 2008, despite Barack Obama and his campaign’s decision to keep Muslims at arm’s-length, over 90 percent of Muslims came out in record numbers for him, including in key swing states such as Florida, Virginia, Ohio, and Michigan. And even with the Muslim community’s growing impatience with the administration’s lack of progress on key issues such as reform of the Patriot Act, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and peace between Israel and Palestine, Muslims remain firmly in the Democratic fold, largely due to the perception that the GOP has grown increasingly hostile to Muslims and Islam.

And there’s no doubt many Muslims associate this growing hostility with the emergence of the Tea Party movement. Much of this perception is due to the much-publicized comments of some Tea Party figures such as Mark Williams, national spokesman for the Tea Party Express, who was fired after making venomous comments critical of Muslims, Islam, and African Americans. And then there was Nevada Republican senate candidate Sharron Angle’s bizarre lamentation regarding Sharia, “We’re talking about a militant terrorist situation, which I believe it isn’t a widespread thing, but it is enough that we need to address, and we have been addressing it..Dearborn, Michigan, and Frankford, Texas are on American soil, and under constitutional law. Not Sharia law. And I don’t know how that happened in the United States. It seems to me there is something fundamentally wrong with allowing a foreign system of law to even take hold in any municipality or government situation in our United States.”

Indeed, such comments and the hatred sometimes displayed on racially charged and denigrating signs at Tea Party rallies has unsurprisingly drawn criticism and condemnation. At its annual convention in July, the NAACP passed a resolution denouncing the “racist element” within the Tea Party movement. “We don’t have a problem with the tea party’s existence,” explained President Benjamin Jealous. “We have an issue with their acceptance and welcoming of white supremacists into their organizations.” Similarly, the Council on American-Islamic Relations has often characterized tea party candidates and activists as “bigoted” and “racist.” 

In a recent USA Today/Gallup poll, 77 percent of people who identified as members of the Tea Party described themselves as white. And while there are a host of loosely associated grassroots organizations (Tea Party Express, Tea Party Nation, Tea Party Patriots to name but a few) that together make up the Tea Party “movement,” there is no dominant organization, party, or hierarchy.

Despite the criticisms, it should known that racial and religious hatred are not regular hallmarks of the Tea Party movement. What brings the many local, regional and. national Tea Party organizations together are the core principles of patriotism, preserving constitutional principle, protesting peaceably against one’s government, opposition to job-killing taxes, burdensome regulation, unemployment (currently around 10 percent), excessive federal spending and our massive national debt (a whopping $14 trillion at last count).

In this year’s 2010 election, the Tea Party movement represented the latest of several waves of grassroots groups who have become permanent parts of the broader modern conservative movement. Previous groups have included Evangelical Christians, church-going Catholics, and national supporters of Texas Rep. Ron Paul. In most instances, the GOP establishment has turned its nose up at the thought of including such converts to the cause. And so, as former House Majority Leader and current Tea Party leader Dick Armey stated, many Tea Partiers intended something of a “hostile takeover” of the GOP; witness the primary defeats of establishment figures such as Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah, Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, and Delaware Rep. Mike Castle. 

Partisan wrangling aside, the bottom-line remains that Muslim Americans share much in common with Tea Party activists: a concern for family, faith, and personal freedom and fiscal responsibility. I should know, I have met and worked with many Tea Party activists. They are honest, hard-working patriots who ask nothing of government (other than to be left alone) and who are genuinely concerned for the legacy we leave future generations. While I don’t expect droves of Muslims to start hoisting “Don’t Tread on Me” flags anytime soon, I do urge Muslims not to fall prey to stereotypes–even of our tea party friends.

Suhail A. Khan serves on the board of directors of the American Conservative Union and as chairman of the Conservative Inclusion Coalition, an organization dedicated to the political involvement of Americans of all ethnic, racial, and faith backgrounds.

13-5

By Roger Harrison, Arab News

INVESTMENT as a process has been the key to the rise of Saudi Arabia as an economic power. Since the mid 1970’s, when the Kingdom decided to use its growing revenues from oil to industrialize by investing in processing plants that used the country’s hydrocarbon resources, this policy decision has needed at least a decade of very large investments to build the plants and the necessary infrastructure.

To build a downstream processing industry is capital intensive. However, the decision perfectly matched the Kingdom’s economic and demographic profile in that it had enormous oil reserves linked to the potential income they would generate and a small population. The government saw the logic in adding value to oil exports by processing them in-country – especially by utilizing natural gas reserves and gas that was until the late 1980’s burned off.

Some Saudi planners saw industrialization as a good opportunity to encourage the participation of both foreign and domestic firms to widen the Kingdom’s sphere of economic activity. Joint ventures with foreign companies became common and mutually beneficial. An important bonus to the Saudi economy was the transfer of technology that came with the investment.

As one local commentator put it recently, Saudi Arabia’s industrial revolution came in a box and the instructions were in English. The Kingdom used its wealth to capitalize where it may on available skills and technology to further its growth and generate its own skills and knowledge base for the future.

Thirty years or so later, the Kingdom is still an attractive investment destination. The landscape has widened from the narrow but lucrative confines of the petrochemical industry into a highly developed market with a variety of areas all offering long-term potential. Perhaps the days of the “quick buck” return on investment have passed, but medium and long-term investments in social and industrial projects are very much alive.

Tal Nazer is the CEO of Bupa Arabia. First business between Bupa and the Nazer group began in 1997. It is a post oil boom company that specializes in catering to the health and care needs for the rapidly changing demographics and social infrastructure in the Kingdom.

“We are one of the few companies that have international shareholders and one of the oldest companies in insurance in Saudi Arabia,” said Nazer, indicating that the company was a long way from the traditional partnerships of the 70s and 80s.

As a result of the increase in population, changing age profile and rising expectations of the increasingly affluent population, the company addresses different aspects of the health-care industry.

For Bupa, hospitals, insurance, health dialogue and care homes are the core of the business, while Bupa Arabia has health insurance as its main focus, an area that reflects the change in social concerns and infrastructure resulting from petrochemical fuelled societal development in the Kingdom. Nazer’s advice to an incoming investor was: “Specialize and do it well.”

Investing in a new business requires capital and adherence to existing local regulations. In 1997, for Bupa Middle East this was relatively easy as there were few if any insurance-specific regulations. However in 2003, insurance laws and regulations came into force.

This, said Nazer, meant that existing shareholders and the company had to make adjustments to conform. They included a minimum capital of SR100 million, a requirement to be a publicly listed company, and a capital input that met the solvency requirements of the Saudi Arabian Monetary Authority (SAMA).

Having met the requirements, completed the paperwork and launched one the most successful IPOs in the Kingdom — nine times over subscribed — Bupa Arabia came into being in 2008.

Nazer reflected on the change brought about by the formation of the current company. “We benefited from local experience and the international expertise,” he said. “We had to go through the processes that any insurance company had to go through, capital, management capability, business plan and due diligence for example, but that was OK,” he said. “The regulations are of a high standard and the reason for that is that the government wants to build an insurance industry of a high standard similar to the banking industry,” he added.

Nazer said that as with any inward investing company in any country, local know-how was important either by using a local partner or bringing in good quality local people to guide the investor through the challenges.

Changes in local employment law can produce very positive results. The Saudi government makes health insurance mandatory for expatriates. “That increased the market from 1 to 7 million customers,” he said. He noted that this had resulted in a knock-on effect on the Saudi market, producing customers who saw the benefits that health insurance gave.

The Saudi population is predominantly young with some 80 percent under 39 years old and 60 percent under 21, according to generally accepted figures. However, it will age and “medical inflation” will become a major factor in insurance. With the mandatory health insurance for expatriates and Saudis working in private sector, health care has become accessible to more people.

These factors, said Nazer, have combined to put pressure on the existing hospital facilities, which has resulted in medical inflation. His concern is to deliver world-class services and can see a growing need for hospital facilities to cope with the future demand. He would like to see facilitation and encouragement for foreign investors to invest in the provision of physical infrastructure, i.e. hospitals, to cope with current and future demand.

The need for local knowledge, however obtained, and the transparency but complexity of regulations was echoed in the experience of Bariq Mining Ltd, the first private company to be granted exploration right for minerals in the Kingdom. Graham Pratt, Bariq’s general manager, said that the application and registration process, although somewhat slow and voluminous, was precisely laid out and transparent.

Operating in the Kingdom now for five years, since the implementation of the new national mining code, and originally set up as an exploration company through the Ministry of Oil and Mineral Resources, it holds several mineral tenements (licenses) and a mining license for its copper mine south of Madinah.

Saudi Arabia is massively wealthy in minerals.  The Arabian Shield that comprises the western half of the country has barely explored wealth, but initial findings hint at “gold rush” potential, but not only in gold. Moreover, it is the declared intent of the Saudi government to establish mining as the “third pillar” of the economy after oil and petrochemicals and so there is a positive investment climate for mining abroad in the Kingdom’s business world.

Pratt described the mining potential in the Kingdom as “huge” and as a genuine opportunity for local investment as well as international. Ma’aden has already identified bauxite and phosphate resources in the northeastern part of the country, but the Arabian Shield, though well studied, has barely been touched. The Saudi authorities are actively encouraging this by opening the doors to 100 percent investor ownership of licenses and a generous disposition towards the repatriation of profits.

“Within 12 months we should be producing copper from our flagship mine,” said Pratt. “We will be the first privately owned producing company for copper or indeed base metal or gold producer in Saudi Arabia, as previously all metals have been produced by the state mining company (Ma’aden).”

An outside investor seeking to establish itself independently, Bariq had no experience of the processes of registration to work within the Kingdom. Urban business legends tell of the difficulty of navigating legal and government procedures, but Pratt recalled that he was pleasantly surprised dealing with the various regulatory authorities.

The process, from initial approach to the granting of licenses is, said Pratt, a time consuming affair in any country. “Mining is a long term investment and we have to think strategically. Each country has its own regulations and it’s a time consuming affair. It may be a little more bureaucratic than some other places and would benefit from automation and digitizing in some areas, but for us as a mining company, five years is typical and really quite reasonable,” he said.

The process of registering a business, however, does take considerably more time than in other parts of the world, where in many places it can be done in an hour. “You can minimize that by doing your homework and get hold of a good local accountant and lawyers,” noted Pratt.

Potential investors are sometimes advised that the only way to forward business in the Kingdom is to develop strong personal relationships when selecting partners or dealing with the necessary formalities. Pratt said that the process was not as well defined as that, but by making good relationships, he had found that there was a commitment to and a good understanding of mining and its potential. “And it’s always nice to know the man you deal with on a personal as well as official basis.”

In a response to a similar enquiry, Axa Cooperative Insurance Company suggested that any investor spend time in ensuring that any proposed partner brings value to a relationship, not only in monetary terms, but in experience and active support of the operation.

The important thing for Pratt was that there was a clear structure and process. “In our experience, the process is as transparent, as clear and as good as anywhere in the world and by far the best in the MENA region,” he added.

It is perhaps another example of the decline of the “fast buck” investment and the rise of long-term, positively regulated and measured development that is beginning to characterize the Kingdom’s investment scene.

The legal system of Saudi Arabia, Shariah, is sometimes viewed as an area of concern in the West and among major investors. In Bariq’s experience, although all dealings are Shariah compliant, there is no differentiation in practice at all.

“Within the framework we work in, you are not aware of whatever legal system you are working in. The framework is there, the regulations are there – end of story,” said Pratt. “Certainly the Shariah principles of equity and fairness come into play. but in the final analysis it has had no effect on our operations.”

Investment needs long-term capital, especially in the high risk mining industry. Traditionally, investment in the Kingdom has been effected by individuals who prefer not to apply it to long-term projects. Mining is by nature a long-term investment and no guarantee of major returns. Pratt estimated that 90 percent of exploration projects and mine developments yield nothing, eight percent will survive and yield a varying degree of profit and perhaps two percent return a bonanza.

“I feel that the local investor looks for more certainty in the use of his capital,” he noted.

Speaking from the perspective of the mining industry, Pratt felt that a major inward investor would encounter challenges in hiring labor. While general tradesmen and administrators were available, there was, he thought, a lack of high-level technically skilled people available. “That’s understandable, as mining is still a young industry, but speaking to other managers, I find it applies to other industries as well,” he said.

While there is a move in the Kingdom to develop industrial technical skills, notable examples being the General Organization for Technical Education and Vocational Training (GOTEVOT) skills development program and the work done by Jeddah Technical College and the Saudi Japanese Higher Institute among others, the output is not sufficient.

In-house training and on-the-job training that many companies provide are seen as a burden and many industrial concerns would welcome a ready supply of well trained local people with high-level skills that integrate well with the needs of industry.

Consequently skilled labor had to be brought in to the country. The process and issuing of visas for labor, even skilled labor not available locally, was, thought Pratt, a major challenge for any industry setting up business in the Kingdom. “A review and easing in the restrictions of visa issuing and eligibility rules would be very welcome,” he said. “I would welcome an education system that produces a tranche of local labor with the skill sets that incoming industries need.”

If this were to come about, then the Kingdom would be able to build an industrial base and national labor pool that would be in a position to add value to the Kingdom’s core products and address the need for jobs for future generations. It would seem to make great sense to export finished aluminum products using cheap energy for example, rather than export raw bauxite or billets.

The question of availability of specialist staff and visas applies to the AXA Cooperative Insurance Company. In a written response asking what two things the company would change with a theoretical “magic wand,” it specified an easing of visa restrictions that currently limit the recruitment of quality expatriate staff to the Kingdom and an improvement in the process of granting business and visit visas to the Kingdom.

Established in the Kingdom in 1972, the company became a 100 percent Saudi-owned company early last year. Their focus has always been commercial insurances, both on a direct basis and also through intermediaries. In the past few years, the development of compulsory medical insurance has become an important factor and looking forward, they say more focus will be given to personal lines. A fillip was provided to the insurance industry with the government move to register all insurance companies as wholly Saudi companies and also the introduction of compulsory medical and motor insurance.

During its time operating here, AXA has noted an ever-increasing awareness and responsibility to employ and develop Saudi nationals in the workplace, which is now a regulatory requirement from SAMA for insurance companies. With training and support, the company claims its Saudi staff are as good as any other nationality.

Currently, 39 percent of the staff is Saudi and that figure is growing year on year, as the company says it is committed to developing an effective Saudi staff capable of managing the company in the years to come.

However, a major hurdle AXA faces as an international company and with businesses worldwide is communication. A key challenge for personal progression in an international company is to be able to effectively speak and write in English, it says.

Once again, people power in the Kingdom is available and they are fully able to acquire the skills needed to contribute to any incoming investor. However, in many cases the skill sets that one would expect from a broad-based education system are not available.

As with Bupa, quality of service is at the centre of AXA’s business. However, the company said that Saudi Arabia remains a price driven market where quality of product and service are often seen as secondary.

That said, from an insurance perspective Saudi Arabia is still a developing market. “But as the economic driver of the region, the KSA market has great potential,” said an AXA spokesperson.

“There are some 30 insurance companies in KSA, a figure which may well be excessive and no doubt some of these companies as a result of poor performances will close or merge with others in the years to come.”

The investment environment in the Kingdom is healthy, developing and can be profitable. Setting up business is, in the experience of many companies including our contributors, a long and complex process, but one that is structured and transparent.

There remain challenges, not least the unavailability of skilled staff, be it in the vocational or professional skills area and, especially in the case of companies that deal outside the Kingdom as a matter of course, in English literacy.

Saudi Arabia has a stable government, huge resources and with both a very healthy credit rating and cash flow, it has a well-developed regulatory structure that seems transparent, if time consuming, to work through.

However as the economic powerhouse of the region, the Kingdom remains and will surely develop as the investment destination of choice, especially with an increasingly sophisticated and growing population and an almost wholly untapped reserve of mineral resources that could be in the long term as sustaining as its oil reserves.

13-5

CPL Michigan

The Michigan Progressive Candidate Training Program (http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=ihugeZmdbg6yxXi6BZby9N9mKKUy%2B6BV) is designed to help leaders develop the skills and resources they need to advance progressive change through local elected office. The Michigan Progressive Candidate Training Program helps individuals who want to lead progressive political change in their community through local and state elected office.

This four-part comprehensive training program provides the nuts and bolts of putting together a winning campaign for local and state office, as well as developing effective leadership skills necessary to advance progressive change.

Goals of the Program

This program is for individuals who are planning or interested in running for elected office in the next five years or who are or will be serving as a campaign manager for a candidate. Our training program includes four comprehensive workshop weekends, peer mentoring, Personal Political Leadership Planning, and coaching.

Workshop Topics

•    Communicating Your Vision & Values Through Narrative
•    The Nuts & Bolts of Being an Elected Official Issues Affecting Progressive Candidates
•    Campaign Planning – Preparing to Win and Stay on Track
•    Fundraising & Cultivating Donors
•    Campaign Financing
•    Message Development and Delivery
•    Voter Contact
•    Panel Discussions with Elected Officials

2011 Progressive Candidate Training Dates

•    March 5th-6th
•    April 9th
•    May 7th
•    June 4th-5th

Apply Online Today! (The application deadline is February 11th, 2011) (http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=iDucSxKnkMQi5lkP1HLnOfHrit80Ne2%2B)

The cost of this training is $300, though partial scholarships are available. Training locations will alternate between Metro-Detroit and Lansing. Individuals registering for this program cannot have already filed, developed an exploratory committee, fundraised, or spent money on their campaign.

If you have any questions please call or email Dessa Cosma, CPL Program Director, at (231)631-4469, dcosma@progressiveleaders.org

Dessa Cosma
Program Director
Michigan Center for Progressive Leadership
www.progressiveleaders.org
231-631-4469

13-5

American Students Raised Funds for Pakistani Flood Victims – Sent Via Helping Hand

The Office bearers of National Honor Society of Westchester Academy for International Studies of Houston visited the Consulate of Pakistan in Houston to receive certificates of appreciation for their work in collecting relief items for the flood victims in Pakistan. These items were given to Helping Hand For Relief & Development In-Kind Donation Center located along Bissonnet at South Kirkwood in the Royal Center, Houston.

The National Honor Society had adopted the Pakistan Flood Relief Drive to assist the Pakistani flood victims. The students collected a huge amount of canned goods, blankets and clothes which were dispatched to Pakistan through the help of a local charity. The Consul General thanked the office bearers for their help in alleviating the suffering of the flood victims and noted that such help would strengthen the bonds between the peoples of Pakistan and the United States. The Consul General also presented Certificate of Appreciation to all office bearers.

They included: Jaclyn Nguyen-President; Juan Avalos-Vice President; Emily Bauer-Secretary; Tzitziki Robles-Treasurer; Ana Laura Gonzalez-Public Relations Officer; Iman Kassir-Historian; Jarred Gillie-Parliamentarian; Ellen Prescott-Community Service Officer; Alberto Halos-Sponsor; and Dr. Natalie Blasingame-Director.

They can be reached at: Alberto Halos, Phone: 713-251-1800 Ext 1966, E-Mail: alberto.halos@springbranchisd.com

‘Gut Them Like a Trout and Hope They Die’

Dr. Rey Garcia doesn’t mince words when you ask him about a House budget recommendation that calls for closing four Texas community colleges.

He calls the recommendation “the height of irresponsibility,” saying it was met with “uniform outrage” among community college students, officials and supporters.

With the state facing a multi-billion-dollar budget deficit, Garcia – president and CEO of the Texas Association of Community Colleges (TACC) – knew that community colleges would suffer cuts in their state funding, just like most other entities receiving state funding. But the recommendation to close Brazosport College in Lake Jackson, Frank Philips College in Borger, Odessa College in Odessa and Ranger College west of Fort Worth came as a complete surprise. “We had no warning,” he said.

In a letter hand-delivered Wednesday to House Speaker Joe Straus and State Rep. Jim Pitts, who chairs the House Appropriations Committee and who explained the bill in the House this week, Garcia said TACC was making an “extraordinary request” that the two leaders “renounce and retract” the recommendation to shutter the four schools. He pointed out in the letter the immediate problems the recommendation is causing – from possible lawsuits if current construction projects are halted, to the impact the recommendation would have on fundraising efforts and the effects closings would have on faculty. “It takes years to build a quality faculty,” wrote Garcia. “It will take moments to destroy it.”

While the House budget proposal would slash $145 million in funding for all Texas community and junior colleges, closing the four colleges was expected to save $39 million over the biennium.
And the reaction from officials of the four colleges recommended for closure? “Complete disbelief,” said Garcia.

The TACC executive said his association began getting calls Monday. Pitts apparently warned the state representatives in whose districts the four colleges lie.

Garcia said Pitts gave the representatives 24 hours notice before the bill was released. Those House members called the respective presidents of the four colleges.

“They were thinking it had to be a joke. Surely it was some kind of misunderstanding. And then when it settled in that there really was something to what they were hearing, it was then a matter of ‘Why me?’”

Two of the colleges are smaller colleges, said Garcia, and the other two are mid-sized. He said as best TACC could tell, the recommendations resulted from a combination of Legislative Budget Board and Appropriations Committee staff performing an enrollment trends analysis that covered a nearly 20-year period and determining that the four community colleges recommended for closure had not grown.

Garcia explained that the four colleges are in very different communities. He said Ranger College does not have the local resources to sustain a college on its own. They would have to have significant increases in tuition rates to stay afloat without state assistance. Brazosport and Odessa colleges, he said, would have to triple or quadruple their tax rates to make up the loss of state revenues. He also noted that Brazosport College is the primary training facility for numerous industries in the area, including BASF and Conoco Phillips. Why would someone want to close a college that is contributing to ensuring that workers are trained and keeping those major companies in Texas, asked Garcia.

“So they gut them like a trout and hope they die.”

13-5

By Parvez Fatteh, Founder of http://sportingummah.com, sports@muslimobserver.com

Maheem Haq, a 12-year-old Muslima in the Baltimore area, was not allowed to play in the first-half of a Mid-Maryland Girls Basketball game because she refused to take off her hijab.  A Hagerstown youth basketball league referee told Haq to remove her headscarf prior to entering the game because it represented a potential safety hazard, to which Haq refused. “I was upset a little bit ’cause I really wanted to play and I enjoy playing basketball,” Haq said.

During halftime, a league administrator granted her a religious exemption and she was allowed to play the second half wearing the hijab. The Mid-Maryland Girls Basketball league is now including in their bylaws that any exception to the uniform rules needs to be put in writing by the child’s parent, which Maheem’s parents have already submitted. “We were very upset when we heard about it because she has been able to play the entire time and there’s never been a problem,” said Connie Cline, a teammate’s mother.

Maheem had in fact been playing in the league for approximately three years without any mention of the hijab prior to her sudden removal from this game. The incident brought back memories of the Iranian girls soccer team that was ruled out of an international tournament last year due their hijabs before a compromise was reached in which the girls were to instead wear caps that did not extend below the ears. In fact, this notion of the hijab being a safety hazard does not even have proper backing in terms of scientific data or case history.

“The referee was within his rights.  He was right to do what he did,” said Daphnie Campbell, a Mid-Maryland Girls’ Basketball official. “I will accept full responsibility for it.  Being new, no, I didn’t know anything about it.  I didn’t know I had to ask for permission, I didn’t know a letter had to be on file.  I didn’t know anything of that,” Campbell said. The referee was deemed to be following the league rules appropriately and will reportedly not be reprimanded. But why did this official simply wake up that morning and decide to enforce this obscure league rule all of a sudden? That remains unclear.

Haq’s team was reportedly willing to forfeit the game in protest, citing religious discrimination against Maheem, but Haq’s family refused to go through with it. Maheem’s father, Mohammad Haq, was both diplomatic and philosophical when giving his reasons for not forfeiting the game. “To inspire other kids as well that you can maintain your religious belief and strike a balance between your active life and still maintain your religious beliefs,” he said.

Maheem’s coach, Mark Hershner, also tried to put a positive spin on things. “I do feel that some people were offended or emotions were hurt, and that’s not what we’re here for.  We’re here to learn sports and maybe some life skills along the way,” said Coach Mark Hershner. And for her part, little Maheem doesn’t seem too phased by all of this. “I feel really happy,” Maheem Haq said.  “I feel great.”

13-5

By Yoichi Shimatsu, New America Media

EDITOR’S NOTE: Yoichi Shimatsu reported on the anti-stealth air-defense program and the bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade for Yazhou Zhoukan (Asia Weekly, Ming Pao Group, Hong Kong) during the NATO Kosovo War of 1999.

HONG KONG—Current flight tests of the Chinese J-20 stealth fighter at a Chengdu aircraft factory are ringing alarm bells inside the Pentagon. Invisible to radar, the high-tech aircraft is upping the ante against the U.S. Navy and Air Force in the Pacific theater.

The takeoff of a Chinese-built stealth aircraft should come as no surprise. It traces its inception to a distant Southern European battlefield more than a decade ago, when the Pentagon and the People’s Liberation Army fought the world’s first electronic war.

As NATO forces based in Albania launched their invasion to “liberate” Kosovo in May 1999, the U.S. Air Force unleashed over the Yugoslav capital its most sophisticated aircraft—the stealth B-2 Spirit bomber and F-117 Nighthawk fighter. On the second night of the Belgrade bombing campaign, however, things went horribly wrong when a Nighthawk was hit with stunning accuracy.
The downing of the U.S. plane realized the worst fears of the electronic-warfare team at the National Security Agency (NSA), whose deputy director at the time was Gen. Michael Hayden. The most expensive U.S. weapons program in history had an Achilles heel—one that made it vulnerable to, of all things, the lowly TV.

The stealth fighter’s electronic cloaking system and low-reflection profile are invisible to one-way radar signals, but television signals wrap around objects—for example, the corners of buildings. By computer-imaging the patterns of reflected waves with a detection system known as passive coherent localization (PCL), Chinese air-defense experts could easily detect the “bright cherry-red profile” of an incoming stealth plane. The Yugoslav federal army zeroed in on the target with Russian-built Kup missile batteries and a MiG interceptor, as described by the former head of Jane’s Defense Weekly.

To prevent further losses of stealth aircraft, the U.S. Air Force bombed a television station in Nis and Radio Television Serbia (RTS) headquarters in Belgrade. Cruise missiles exploded strands of carbon fiber over electric power lines to prevent their use as TV signal receivers. (At the time, I referred to the anti-stealth air-defense strategy as “McLuhan’s War,” after the media theorist Marshall McLuhan, who had decades earlier suggested that television news feeds were undermining public support for the Vietnam conflict and creating a global village.)

The Yugoslav military retrieved television transmitters from the bombed-out RTS tower and delivered them to the Chinese Embassy, which immediately began broadcasting late-night Chinese movies. The foreign diplomats had a good alibi, since some 6,000 illegal migrants from China heading for Western Europe were stranded in Yugoslavia and had no other entertainment.

The pilot of the F-117 parachuted, took evasive action and was retrieved by a NATO helicopter, but the aircraft was disassembled by local farmers and the critical parts auctioned. The Russians took the external radar-absorbing coating material, while the Chinese military attaché obtained the internal electronic cloaking system. Air Force One contains similar technology, a hot-wired cocoon of copper filament spun inside its skin, which renders it invisible to radar-guided missiles. Also included in the package were some angular exhaust vents that suppress the jet’s heat signature. A commercial cargo plane from Hong Kong was spotted by satellite picking up large crates at Belgrade Airport.

Americans may be tempted to conclude that the Chinese stole or pirated the stealth ware, but the fact is that the technology was captured from invaders as a fair prize of war.

Just days after the F-117 downing, Pentagon officials gave a stern warning to China’s Foreign Ministry to return the stealth parts or face dire consequences within two weeks, according to European military officers interviewed by Jens Holsoe, Kosovo correspondent for the Danish newspaper Politiken. The Chinese diplomats were speechless and clueless, since electronic warfare was run by the People’s Liberation Army and classified top secret.

Around midnight of May 7-8, 1999, the Pentagon threat came due. A joint special forces team of British and Kosovar commandos pointed laser beams at the rear wall of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. Five smart bombs, delivered by a high-flying B-2 bomber, struck the PLA defense attache’s basement office with pinpoint precision. The commandos entered the compound pointing flashlights and a video camera “as if searching for something,” according to neighbors interviewed by Japanese intelligence agents posted in Belgrade. Earlier that week, the Yugoslav capital was swirling with rumors that President Slobodan Milosevic was residing as guest inside the Chinese Embassy. Instead, two young journalists from Guangming Daily, moonlighting as translators of Serbian, were killed in the blasts. After several minutes, the raiders ran from the site just before flames erupted out of the basement.

Within minutes, an American officer posted at the NATO signals-intelligence base in Vincenza, Italy, startled his European colleagues by shouting, “We got the bastards!” From his joyous outburst and their maps, the Europeans knew immediately that the embassy attack was premeditated. But just before the daily 10 a.m. press conference in Brussels, a correspondent for an American newsmagazine overheard a junior officer suggesting to the NATO press spokesman that the bombing was an “accident due to an out-of-date map.”

Following up on this claim from Hong Kong, where I was then a reporter, I phoned the CIA-Pentagon mapmaking agency, whose staffer explained that the map aboard the B-2 was correct to within minutes of the raid and that the highly professional cartographers were unjustly forced to take the blame by “more powerful agencies.” By then, thousands of enraged Chinese civilians were hurling stones at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing, while indoors, by a fireplace, the U.S. ambassador hurriedly burned documents on American spy activities in China.

In the words of a National Intelligence Council veteran, a “civil war” was breaking out between the White House and State Department on one hand, and the Pentagon and the CIA on the other. Prior to authorizing the bombing, President Bill Clinton had been led to believe that the target was the base of a Serbian militia unit that was conducting ethnic cleansing and not a diplomatic compound. Despite the high-level deception and blatant violation of international law, Hayden, the U.S Air Force general in charge of electronic warfare operations went on to become the director of the NSA and the CIA.

While the corporate media repeated the false mantra of an “accidental bombing,” the myth of the invincibility of American military technology was shattered.

Thus the true story of a downed American Nighthawk was incinerated in the flames of a Chinese embassy in Southern Europe. Yet now, like a phoenix rising from its ashes, the mysterious bird is reborn in China, spreading its dark wings to soar over the moonlit Pacific.

13-5