We welcome your comments to this and any other CIJR publication. Please address your response to: Rob Coles, Publications Chairman, Canadian Institute for Jewish Research, PO Box 175, Station H, Montreal QC H3G 2K7 – Tel: (514) 486-5544 – Fax:(514) 486-8284; E-mail: rob@isranet.wpsitie.com
Assad’s Hollow Mandate: Steven Heydemann, Foreign Policy, June 2, 2014— On June 3, in a parody of democracy, Bashar al-Assad will be reelected as president of Syria for his third seven-year term.
Deal for U.S. Soldier Reignites Debate About Talking to Terrorists: Paul Koring, Globe & Mail, June 2, 2013— President Barack Obama's decision to swap five high-ranking Taliban for a U.S. soldier some regard as a deserter has ignited a furore over whether deal-making with terrorist groups increases the risk of attack.
Boko Haram and the Dynamics of Denial: Mark Durie, Frontpage, May 15, 2014— It is a common refrain of pious Muslims in the face of atrocities done by other Muslims in the name of Islam that Islam must not be shamed.
Why Shavuot is All But Ignored Across America: Marissa Brostoff, Tablet, May 17, 2014— When it comes to theological significance, the late-spring festival of Shavuot is no slouch: The event it commemorates—God giving the Torah to the Jews at Mount Sinai—is arguably the most pivotal in the narrative of the Jewish people.
How Could Obama Ignore Radical Islam in 9/11 Speech?: Morton A. Klein & Daniel Mandel, Algemeiner, May 20, 2014
Doors Open for Muslim Brotherhood?: Tarek Fatah, Sun News, June 2, 2014
The Muslim Brotherhood and Terrorist Organizations: Valentina Colombo, Gatestone Institute, May 6, 2014
Shavuot and Diversity: Jerusalem Post, June 2, 2014
Steven Heydemann
Foreign Policy, June 2, 2014
On June 3, in a parody of democracy, Bashar al-Assad will be reelected as president of Syria for his third seven-year term. If he serves out this term, Assad will be eligible to run for a fourth term in 2021 that would extend his presidency to 28 years — two years short of his father's tenure. Syrians may yet be spared almost six decades of direct Assad family rule, but the outcome of Tuesday's vote is a foregone conclusion. Tuesday's election is easy to ridicule, but it would be a mistake to dismiss it as a meaningless charade. Assad's victory will further weaken international leverage over his regime, will be used by his authoritarian allies to sustain their support — including in the U.N. Security Council — and will diminish prospects for a negotiated settlement of the Syrian conflict.
The United States, the U.N., and the more than 100 governments that constitute the Friends of Syria Group (FOS), an alliance of governments opposed to Assad's continued rule, should take steps to thwart the Assad regime's efforts to exploit this phony election, enhance its legitimacy, and validate its self-serving claims to a military victory over the Syrian opposition. A preemptive move by the U.N. General Assembly, in the form of a resolution denouncing the election, rejecting the outcome as illegitimate, and insisting on a negotiated settlement of the conflict under the terms of the U.N. Geneva Protocol of June 2012, would be a small but important step in this direction.
Still, there are far more meaningful measures that can, and should, be taken. The United States and other FOS governments, which include Egypt, France, Germany, Italy, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Britain, can implement policies to strip the Assad regime of its legal and political legitimacy, transferring elements of sovereignty, including control over embassies, to recognized bodies of the Syrian opposition. On May 12, France closed the Syrian embassy in Paris to protest the June 3 election. Germany and Belgium have denied permission for Syrian embassies to hold expatriate voting. These are useful short-term steps, but longer-term measures to challenge the legitimacy of the regime are needed. In playing the sovereignty card, the United States and other FOS governments will not only make their rejection of the Assad regime's phony election clear, but also gain leverage in their efforts to move the Syrian conflict toward a negotiated settlement.
Syria's conflict has left 160,000 dead and more than nine million displaced. It has wreaked havoc on the country's civilian population, decimated its economy, frayed its territorial integrity, and fueled sectarian spillover that threatens the stability of neighboring states. That an election is taking place at all in the midst of such conditions underscores the determination of the Assad regime to assert its standing as the sovereign authority in Syria, the outsized importance it attaches in doing so to the kind of hollow, ritualistic displays of legalism and political participation this election represents, and the ease with which autocrats can appropriate and distort the vocabulary and form of democratic politics.
The regime and its supporters have pitched the upcoming election as a major step forward in Syria's democratic development. The June 3 vote has been organized according to electoral regulations approved in a February 2012 referendum to amend the Syrian constitution. Under the revised electoral law, Syria's president will be chosen in a multi-candidate election for the first time since the Ba'ath Party seized power in March 1963. For the past 40 years, Syrian presidents were not so much elected as affirmed through national plebiscites in which the sole candidate was routinely supported by upwards of 98 percent of participants, giving rise to any number dark jokes concerning the fate of the 1-2 percent of dissenters.
The Assad regime has billed the 2014 election as the first in which the incumbent will face competition. The Syrian, Iranian, pro-Hezbollah, and even Russian media are covering the election "race" with great fanfare. However, the fine print of the new election laws ensure that the playing field is anything but level. Candidates must be approved by 35 members of the regime's tame Parliament and by the Supreme Constitutional Court, and cannot have been convicted of a "dishonorable felony," a category that includes most political acts criminalized by the regime. Candidates must also have been resident in Syria continuously for the past 10 years — a condition that renders most credible opposition leaders ineligible to run…
[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]
DEAL FOR U.S. SOLDIER REIGNITES
DEBATE ABOUT TALKING TO TERRORISTS
Paul Koring
Globe & Mail, June 2, 2014
President Barack Obama's decision to swap five high-ranking Taliban for a U.S. soldier some regard as a deserter has ignited a furore over whether deal-making with terrorist groups increases the risk of attack. "We didn't negotiate with terrorists," insisted Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, explaining that it was a prisoner-of-war exchange and thus different. But many regard Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, now 28, as a deserter, not a soldier captured by the enemy. After sending e-mails to his family denouncing the war, then-Private Bergdahl shed his helmet and weapons and walked away from a remote mountain outpost in Afghanistan's Paktika province five years ago. At least six U.S. soldiers were subsequently killed in the massive hunt to find the disenchanted missing soldier who had dabbled in Buddhism and tried – but failed – to join the French Foreign Legion.
"I don't understand why we're trading prisoners at Gitmo for somebody who deserted during a time of war, which is an act of treason," Matt Vierkant, a member of the same army unit, told CNN, using the shorthand name for the U.S. detention centre at Guantanamo Bay naval base. Senator John McCain, the former naval aviator who spent five years as a prisoner of war being tortured in North Vietnam, said he understood the impulse to bring every American home, but decried the deal as an example of Mr. Obama's deeply flawed Afghanistan exit strategy. He warned that the senior Taliban who were ordered released by Mr. Obama were among "the hardest of the hard core" and could pose a threat to the United States. "If they re-enter the fight, it will put American lives at risk," Sen. McCain said, noting the only known conditions on their release to Qatar was that they not be free to leave the wealthy Gulf emirate for a year. Susan Rice, the President's national security adviser, played down the threat. "In all likelihood," she said, "they will not pose a national security risk."
In Kabul, Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who was reportedly kept in the dark about the swap, "is now even more distrustful of U.S. intentions," said one of his aides. The Taliban dismissed notions that freeing the five from Guantanamo, where they have been held for 12 years, will help long-stalled talks between insurgents and the Afghan government. "It won't help the peace process in any way, because we don't believe in the peace process," said Zabihullah Mujahid, a spokesman for the radical Islamic group that ruled Afghanistan and sheltered al-Qaeda before being toppled after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. In Washington, the President's critics denounced the swap. "It sends a message," said Senator Ted Cruz, the Canadian-born Republican from Texas. "Capture a U.S. soldier [and] you can trade that soldier for five terrorists."
Senior administrations officials defended the swap even as it emerged that former Obama cabinet members, including Hillary Clinton, had rejected freeing high-ranking Taliban prisoners. Mike Rogers, the Republican chairman of the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee, said: "I am extremely troubled … that the United States negotiated with terrorists," warning "this decision will threaten the lives of American soldiers for years to come." The White House ducked questions about whether Sgt. Bergdahl had voluntarily left his post. The Pentagon "has been and will continue to be the lead in terms of evaluating all of the circumstances surrounding his initial detention and his captivity," said Mr. Obama's spokesman Jay Carney.
Nothing by way of explanation has yet been heard from Sgt. Bergdahl, who was plucked from a remote rendezvous spot by U.S. Special Forces and flown first to Bagram air base near Kabul and then to Germany. He will eventually return to the United States to face intense scrutiny – and possibly a court martial. In messages home shortly before he walked away from his post, Sgt. Bergdahl, who has twice been promoted while in captivity, made clear his disillusionment with the war. "Life way too short to care … I am ashamed to even be American … I am sorry for everything. The horror that is America is disgusting," he wrote in e-mails first made public by Rolling Stone magazine two years ago. "The U.S. army … is the army of liars, backstabbers, fools, and bullies," he wrote – views that sparked a renewed firestorm on social media in the last few days. Meanwhile, the tiny Idaho town of Hailey was festooned with yellow ribbons and balloons awaiting the sergeant's return. "There's a lot of controversy," Adam Marks told The Los Angeles Times. "People are saying he's a traitor and that he deserted his post. But everybody here is just happy he's coming home."
BOKO HARAM AND THE DYNAMICS OF DENIAL
Mark Durie
Frontpage, May 15, 2014
It is a common refrain of pious Muslims in the face of atrocities done by other Muslims in the name of Islam that Islam must not be shamed. Whenever an Islamic atrocity potentially dishonors Islam, non-Muslims are asked to agree that ‘This is not Islamic’ so that the honor of Islam can be kept pristine. The real issue, however, is not what would be good or bad for Islam’s reputation; Islam is not the victim here. The pressing issue is not to get people to think well of Islam, but how, for instance, in the case of Boko Haram’s kidnapping of the Nigerian schoolgirls, the girls can be rescued and, above all, how Boko Haram’s murderous rampage can be halted. Qasim Rashid, an American Muslim, recently published on FoxNews.com a heart-felt expression of deep distress at the kidnapping of Nigerian girls by Boko Haram (‘What would Muhammad say to Boko Haram’). He declared that Muhammad himself would not recognize this group as acting in line with his teachings: “Boko Haram’s claim that Islam motivates their kidnappings is no different than Adolf Hitler’s claim that Christianity motivated his genocide. This terrorist organization acts in direct violation of every Islamic teaching regarding women.”
Qasim Rashid is not the only Muslim who has been speaking out in support of the kidnapped girls, while denying that their plight has anything to do with Islam. Qasim Rashid is a member of the Ahmaddiyah community, which is regarded as unorthodox by most Muslims. Indeed Ahmaddiyahs are often severely persecuted for their beliefs in Islamic nations. Although Qasim Rashid does not speak for mainstream Islam, he is nevertheless to be commended for speaking up against Boko Haram’s repugnant acts. But does the claim that Boko Haram is not Islamic hold up to scrutiny? What counts as a valid manifestation of Islam? Ahmaddiyah beliefs can be considered Islamic, for those who hold them do so on the basis of a reasoned interpretation of Islamic canonical sources, even if the majority of Muslims reject them as Muslims. By the same token, the beliefs of Boko Haram must also be considered a form of Islam, for they too are held on the basis of a reasoned interpretation of Islamic canonical sources.
It needs to be acknowledged that Boko Haram has not arisen in a vacuum. As Andrew Bostom has pointed out, violent opposition to non-Islamic culture has been a feature of Nigerian Islam for centuries. Today this hatred is being directed against Western education and secular government, but in the past it was indigenous Africa cultures which were targeted for brutal treatment, including enslavement and slaughter. The modern revival of absolutist Sharia-compliant Islam in the north of Nigeria is a process which has deep roots in history. It has also been in progress for decades. Khalid Yasin, an African American convert to Islam and globe-trotting preacher, waxed lyrical about the advance of Sharia law in Nigeria on Australian national radio in 2003: “If we look at the evolution of the Sharia experiment in Nigeria for instance. It’s just a wonderful, phenomenal experience. It has brought about some sweeping changes, balances, within the society, regulations in terms of moral practices and so many things. …What did the Sharia provide? Always dignity, protection, and the religious rights?”
But let us consider the evidence Qasim Rashid gives for his view that Muhammad would disown Boko Haram. His arguments can be summarized as follows: ‘Boko Haram violates the Koran 24:34 [i.e. Sura 24:33] which commands, “and force not your women to unchaste life,” i.e. [this is] a condemnation of Boko Haram’s intention to sell these girls into prostitution.’ ‘They violate Koran 4:20 [i.e. Sura 4:19] which declares, “it is not lawful for you to inherit women against their will; nor should you detain them,” i.e. a specific repudiation of Boko Haram’s kidnapping and detention.’ ‘Prophet Muhammad’s dying words embodied these commandments. He implored, “Do treat your women well and be kind to them, for they are your partners and committed helpers.”’ The seeking of knowledge is an obligation on all Muslims, including ‘secular knowledge’. ‘Islam … commands female education.’
Although Qasim Rashid’s views are sincerely held, his reasoning is weak. Let us consider his points in order. Compel not your slave-girls — Sura 24:33…Contra Qasim Rashid, Sura 24:33 does not say ‘force not your women’ but: “… compel not your slave-girls to prostitution when they desire to keep chaste, in order to seek the frail goods of this world’s life. And whoever compels them, then surely after their compulsion Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.” (The Quran translation used here is cited from a translation by Ahmaddiya scholar Muhammad Maulana Ali). The word translated ‘slave-girl’ here can also mean a young woman, but in this passage it clearly refers to female slaves. A standard interpretation of this verse by Sunni commentators – such as Ibn Kathir – is that if someone owns a slave girl, he should not prostitute her, but if he does, Allah will forgive her.
Strictly speaking, this verse does not appear to apply to the situation of the Nigerian girls taken by Boko Haram. The outrage is that they were taken captive and enslaved in the first place, becoming what the Koran refers to as ‘those whom your right hand possesses’. That they may have been raped by their captors seems highly likely, but this is not the same thing as being prostituted to produce income for their owners. Islam permits men to have sexual intercourse with their slave women, and also to sell them into the service of another, but it frowns on hiring them out for prostitution. In Sura 33:50 of the Koran it is stated that it was permissible for Muhammad to have sex with his female slaves: “O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesses, out of those whom Allah has given thee as prisoners of war”, and in verse 23:6 this prerogative is extended to Muslim believers: “Successful indeed are the believers … who restrain their sexual passions except in the presence of their mates [their wives], of those whom their right hands possess.”
The actions and teaching of Muhammad also support the practice of sexual slavery for women taken captive in jihad. Chapter 547 of the Sahih Muslim, a revered collection of sayings of Muhammad considered reliable by most Muslims, is entitled ‘It is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a captive woman…’. Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, the translator and editor of the Sahih Muslim, added the following footnote to this chapter: “As for the expression malakat aymanukum (those whom your right hands possess) [it] denotes slave-girls, i.e. women who were captured in the Holy War … sexual intercourse with these women is lawful with certain conditions.” Boko Haram is reported to be intending to sell the girls at a slave market. This is no doubt based upon the precedent of Muhammad’s own practice. There are many examples from Muhammad’s actions and those of his companions which could be cited. For example, after putting the men of the Jewish Quraiza tribe in Medina to the sword, Muhammad’s biographer Ibn Isaq reports that he sold some of the Jewish women and used the money to buy horses and weapons…
[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]
WHY SHAVUOT IS ALL BUT IGNORED ACROSS AMERICA
Marissa Brostoff
Tablet, May 17, 2014
When it comes to theological significance, the late-spring festival of Shavuot is no slouch: The event it commemorates—God giving the Torah to the Jews at Mount Sinai—is arguably the most pivotal in the narrative of the Jewish people. But from the treatment it receives next to its more popular siblings—at least within non-Orthodox American communities—you wouldn’t know it. Passover gets celebrated at the White House and inspires novels, Yom Kippur turned Sandy Koufax into an American Jewish hero, and Hanukkah is so visible that conservative talk radio hosts think it threatens Christmas. Shavuot, meanwhile, can’t even satisfy Tom Lehrer, who “spent Shavuos, in East St. Louis/A charming spot but clearly not the spot for me.”
“When you ask people what’s their favorite holiday, I’ve heard people say Passover, Hanukkah, Sukkot, Purim,” says Jonathan Sarna, who teaches American Jewish history at Brandeis University. “I think it’s harder for people to find an emotional attachment to Shavuot than to almost any other Jewish holiday.” According to Sarna and other historians, Shavuot’s trouble catching on is nothing new—it goes back, they say, to the fall of the Second Temple in the year 70 C.E.
In its earliest incarnation, Shavuot marked a pilgrimage to Jerusalem for the sacrifice of the harvest’s first fruits and is one of a historical trio of harvest celebrations, along with Sukkot and Passover, known as the shalosh regalim. According to Paul Steinberg, a rabbi at the Conservative synagogue Valley Beth Shalom in Los Angeles and the author of a series of books on the Jewish holidays, rabbis in the Talmudic period needed to reinvent Shavuot after the Jews left Israel for the Diaspora and no longer traveled to Jerusalem with harvest offerings. So, through what Steinberg calls the use of “complicated mathematical formulas” that were debated for centuries, the sages associated Shavuot with the giving of the Torah. But that interpretive shift, says Steinberg, has not “captured the imagination of Jews in America or anywhere else.” (According to Reform rabbi Andy Bachman, who leads Brooklyn’s Congregation Beth Elohim, some early Zionist settlers went so far as to explicitly reject the rabbinic interpretation of the holiday in favor of the agricultural one and celebrated Shavuot by dancing in the fields and riding on tractors.)
In the United States, Shavuot has met with particularly bad fortune. “They used to say that Jewish holidays needed mazel,” or luck, Sarna says. Hanukkah and Passover—located next to major Christian holidays that Jews want an alternative to—have mazel. Shavuot, marooned in the long stretch between Passover and the High Holidays, has the opposite. “Passover is the last Jewish gesture of the year before you disappear into summer camp, Memorial Day, et cetera,” Bachman says. Until recently, Shavuot’s overlap with the end of the school year actually did confer some mazel at many Reform and Conservative synagogues, because Confirmation ceremonies—celebrations for high school students who have continued their Jewish education in addition to or instead of bar and bat mitzvahs—have traditionally been held on the holiday. But many congregations, including Bachman’s and Steinberg’s, have recently dropped Confirmation, which is increasingly seen an accommodation to Protestantism without authentic Jewish roots—another inadvertent blow to Shavuot.
Beyond the bad mazel, though, some conjecture that Shavuot may simply be too abstract to become popular among all but the most engaged or observant Jews. “The holidays that have done really well here are either firmly grounded in the home or allow for a kind of interplay between the synagogue and the home,” says Jenna Weissman Joselit, who teaches American Jewish history at George Washington University. Home-based holidays have strong elements of material and ritual—seders for Passover, sukkahs for Sukkot, menorahs for Hanukkah. But on Shavuot, “there’s no stuff and nothing to do, if you don’t go to shul,” Joselit says. “It’s a very serious holiday about law and responsibility and duty.” (All of this might be said as well for the High Holidays, which of course don’t lack for attendance. But the High Holidays make these themes personal, while Shavuot applies them to the Jews as a people—which, Joselit argues, makes them feel more remote.)
Shavuot is the consummate rabbis’ holiday: Its difficult themes of revelation, law, and collective responsibility make it a favorite among scholars—who struggle with how to share their enthusiasm with the laity. Elliot Dorff, a rabbi and professor of theology at American Jewish University in Los Angeles, calls it “my holiday”—precisely for the reasons their congregants may not. And Sarna says, “Shavuot is the holiday of books—it’s a harder sell, but we’re the People of the Book. Maybe it is our most authentic and distinctive holiday in that way.” This idea might be starting to catch on: In the past few years, some synagogues have begun holding a tikkun leil Shavuot, or all-night study session, to celebrate the holiday. In its original form, the tikkun, first practiced in the 16th century by kabbalists who were themselves trying to revitalize Shavuot, involved prayer and Torah study from dusk until dawn; non-Orthodox congregations that hold the celebration now usually substitute lectures and roundtable discussions on a variety of subjects. Dorff said that Temple Beth Am, the Conservative synagogue he attends, can pull in 500 people for its tikkun (this year themed around “ethical, spiritual, halakhic implications of our food choices”), with 100 still remaining when the sun rises…
[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]
How Could Obama Ignore Radical Islam in 9/11 Speech?: Morton A. Klein & Daniel Mandel, Algemeiner, May 20, 2014—President Barack Obama recently delivered an address inaugurating the new 9/11 Museum.
Doors Open for Muslim Brotherhood?: Tarek Fatah, Sun News, June 2, 2014—Author John Goddard is a history buff of sorts. His latest book, Inside The Museums: Toronto's Heritage Sites and Their Most Prized Objects, is an in-depth tour of our history ranging from the battle at Fort York to the Upper Canada Rebellion.
The Muslim Brotherhood and Terrorist Organizations: Valentina Colombo, Gatestone Institute, May 6, 2014—A new terror group, Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis [ABM], just officially entered the scene. Both the U.S. State Department and the British government included it, at the beginning of April, in their list of proscribed terrorist organizations.
Shavuot and Diversity: Jerusalem Post, June 2, 2014 —It was a temporary and uncharacteristic moment of Jewish unity, the rabbis teach, which facilitated the giving of the Torah on Mount Sinai.
Contents:
Visit CIJR’s Bi-Weekly Webzine: Israzine.
CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing is available by e-mail.
Please urge colleagues, friends, and family to visit our website for more information on our ISRANET series.
To join our distribution list, or to unsubscribe, visit us at https://isranet.org/.
The ISRANET Daily Briefing is a service of CIJR. We hope that you find it useful and that you will support it and our pro-Israel educational work by forwarding a minimum $90.00 tax-deductible contribution [please send a cheque or VISA/MasterCard information to CIJR (see cover page for address)]. All donations include a membership-subscription to our respected quarterly ISRAFAX print magazine, which will be mailed to your home.
CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing attempts to convey a wide variety of opinions on Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world for its readers’ educational and research purposes. Reprinted articles and documents express the opinions of their authors, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research.
Rob Coles, Publications Chairman, Canadian Institute for Jewish Research/ L'institut Canadien de recherches sur le Judaïsme, www.isranet.org
Tel: (514) 486-5544 – Fax:(514) 486-8284 ; ber@isranet.wpsitie.com
