|
Tuesday, 10 April 2007 18:44 |
By JIM GENARO
Despite the complexity of the challenges facing the Middle East, peace in the region is possible, according to former CBS News correspondent Mitchell Krauss.
The retired journalist and radio news anchor outlined some of those challenges to about 100 people at UNC Ashevilleís Humanities Lecture Hall on April 3 in a talk titled ìThe Middle East: Is Peace Possible?î
The lecture was part of a series of annual talks sponsored by the of
Western North Carolina chapter of the World Affairs Council to honor
Barbara Chisolm, an Asheville resident who was the first woman
president of the national organization. She died in 2005.
ìAll of the groups in the Middle East that are vying for power ... give
us the impression that the situation is much more complicatedî than it
is, Krauss said.
The intensity of the regionís conflicts may seem strange to many
Americans, he added, because Westerners are unaccustomed to the degree
of religious fervor that is common in much of the Middle East.
Krauss noted that among nations, the U.S. is the ìmost religious in terms of church attendance.î
However, the mix of faiths in the Middle East and the intense passion
of their adherents creates ìa cauldron of ideas that often conflict and
lead to violence,î he said.
Many of the regionís challenges result from the artificially formulated
boundaries that were imposed on the Middle East by the Treaty of
Versailles, which ended World War I, Krauss said.
Having defeated the Ottoman Turkish Empire, which had long ruled much
of the Middle East, the American and European victors divided the area
into nations based on political aims.
They did not, however, take into account the various ethnic and
religious affiliations of people in the region and, as a result, people
of very differing backgrounds were often lumped into the same country.
Iraqís mix of Shiites, Sunis and Kurds is one reflection of this
arbitrary process of division, Krauss noted.
Furthermore, centuries of Ottoman rule had had a stifling effect on
Arabic society, he said. The lively intellectual and philosophical
culture that had flourished in the region during the early middle ages
had ìreceded into a very closed society under an archaic clan from
Turkey,î Krauss told the audience.
As the U.S. became an increasingly automobile-dependent country in the
1930s, the Middle East became more important as the source of vast oil
reserves.
A significant development in U.S.-Arab relations came when President
Franklin Delano Roosevelt ìagreed to support Saudi independence,
meaning that we would not interfere with the internal affairs of these
countries ... as long as our oil supply was secured,î he noted.
Returning to the present situation in Iraq, Krauss said that a central
question is what the role of the countryís Shiite majority should be ó
and how closely aligned it is with Shiites in Iran.
ìMost of the Shiites in southern Iraq are not necessarily to be considered the pawns of Iran,î he said.
During the war between Iran and Iraq, many of these Shiites were
involved in fighting their Iranian counterparts, Krauss noted. This
history remains a source of tension between the two groups.
As to the possible effects of a withdrawal of American forces from Iraq, Krauss said he is more optimistic than some observers.
ìI am not one of the group that believes that if we leave Iraq now, chaos will ensue,î he told the audience.
He argued that the current levels of violence are the result of current
conditions in Iraq and that the presence of American forces is not
helping the situation.
He also addressed the concern expressed by many that without the U.S.
presence, terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda would flourish.
ìThis is certainly an important consideration,î he acknowledged.
However, he said that most Iraqis have grown frustrated with the impact
that foreign fighters have had on the country. This growing intolerance
for terrorism would likely lead the Iraqi people to isolate and
suppress such groups, he argued.
Switching his focus to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Krauss said that security is a primary concern for Israel.
The country faces threats on several fronts ó including Hezbollah in
Syria and Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian Territories, he noted.
Furthermore, Israel feels threatened by the rhetoric coming from
Tehran ó such as Iranian President Ahmadinejadís statements about
ìwiping the Jews outî and his denial of the holocaust, Krauss said.
ìThat certainly doesnít cause the Israelis to have any comfort about that situation,î he added.
At the same time, the Israeli government is exceptionally weak right
now, he said, and knows that it must make concessions ó provided the
Hamas-led Palestinian government accepts the most basic demands of
Israel, such as diplomatic recognition and renunciation of violence.
One positive development in the Middle East is the growth of
independent media ó facilitated largely by satellite television, Krauss
said.
Arabic news networks such as Al-Jazeera provide a contrasting
perspective to the state-sponsored media outlets that, for many years,
were the only sources of information to which many in the region had
access, he noted.
The U.S. government has concerns about Al-Jazeera, he said, ìbecause it represents an Arab perspective, not ours.î
But, he added, ìthat is their constituency and Fox News certainly has its own point of view.î
Videotaped messages by Osama bin Ladin have often been delivered to Al-Jazeera, he noted.
He joked that he ìalways thought if we just waited around when the guy
handed in the tape and followed him, weíd catch Osama bin Ladin.î
ìMaybe we donít want to find him,î Krauss added. ìWeíd have to put him
on trial and that would be worse than the Saddam Hussein trial.î
Despite the challenges in Iraq, Krauss said that he thought the country
could eventually stabilize. Similarly war-torn nations, such as
Vietnam, have eventually become peaceful, he noted.
ìThese countries have worked their way out of this mess,î Krauss said.
ìHanoi is a booming city. Itís not the kind of regime we like, but
neither is China.î
Freedom and democracy are not necessarily synonymous, he added.
ìWe have a different society here that can tolerate dissent,î Krauss noted.
However, in Iraq and other war-torn places, most people are more
interested in basic survival than in what form of government is in
power, he added.
ìIf your government canít give you the basic elements of life, what are
you going to do?î Krauss asked. ìYouíre going to join some organization
that can.î
This is why many people join extremist groups like Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood, he said.
These organizations provide food, medical care, education and other
basic necessities that endear many followers who otherwise might not
support their radical views and militant tactics, Krauss explained.
Within two days after the recent fighting between Israel and Lebanon
stopped, Hezbollah had tables set up throughout Lebanon, handing out
food and providing medical aid, he said.
ìThat was something that the government could not do,î Kruass added.
ìIf weíd had that with (Hurricane) Katrina, it would have been a whole
lot better.î
Krauss said he disagrees with the idea that the war on terror
constitutes a ìclash of civilizations. Our civilization is not as
monolithic as we sometimes portray it to be ... nor are Muslims.î
Krauss then answered questions from audience members.
ìWeíve heard a lot of talk about splitting Iraq into three countries,î one man observed. ìHow do you feel about that?î
ìItís easier said than done,î Krauss replied.
While the Kurds in northern Iraq do enjoy a high level of autonomy, in
much of the rest of the country ó especially Baghdad ó Sunnis and
Shiites ìare so intermingled that itís going to be tough,î he said.
ìAnd I donít think that we can impose that.î
A woman asked if Krauss thought that ìthe threat of terrorism is being exploited for political purposes in the U.S.î
ìItís exploitation if itís being done in an exploitative way,î he
replied. ì9/11 was a total breach of security on the part of the U.S.
government and security agencies. Weíve got to be vigilant all the
time.î
However, he added, fear can be ìused as a diversion. You could overdo
that to the extent that you destroy your life and become a lock-down
nation.î
A man asked if ìlabeling groups ëterroristí is an impediment to the peace process.î
Krauss affirmed this view, saying there ìmight be some good things that these groups are doing.î
By supporting the positive things such groups do, the U.S. might be able to discourage their terroristic tendencies, he added.
The Irish Republican Army is one example, he said, of a group that ìhad
a way of separating their militant side from their peaceful side.î
A male student brought the discussion back to the title of Kraussí talk by asking, ìIs peace possible?î
ìYouíre never going to have total peace,î Krauss answered. ìWhat we
mean is, ëCan you have a normalized situation where violence is not
used to settle disputes?íî
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
