|
November , 2002 Opinion Editorials http://www.aljazeerah.info |
||
|
Human Price of the Israeli Occupation of Palestine Mission and meaning of Al-Jazeerah
|
Balanced
U.S. policy key to Mideast peace
Nigeria: Tragic mistake The Miss World contest is at the best of times a silly affair which,
many have argued convincingly, degrades those who take part in it. The
competition certainly perpetuates an out-of-date view of women as
unintelligent beings notable only for their looks. Unfortunately, this
vapid event has moved from the stupid to the tragic. Over 200 people have
lost their lives because of it. The decision to stage the Miss World
contest in Nigeria, a country with a significant Muslim population during
the holy month of Ramadan defied all common sense. It demonstrated, if
demonstration were needed, that the people behind this half-witted event
were every bit as half-witted themselves. Though they have attempted to
distance themselves from the deadly riots that followed the blasphemy
produced by a local newspaper, the tensions that were unleashed had been
building for weeks as a direct result of their actions. What one of the promoters chose to term as “innocent fun” has
turned out to be a deadly horror. The organizers have now decided to move
this tacky event to London, which was where it originated four decades ago
as a publicity stunt for a chain of ballroom dancing venues. The organizers are hinting darkly that they made a mistake in assuming
that Nigeria was a sufficiently stable country to host what they keep
trying to pretend is a genuine and important international event. Blaming
Nigeria, however, is unfair. Of course, those Nigerians who were party to
organizing the unseemly parade are certainly guilty of a grievous lack of
judgement, the worse because a moment’s thought would have told them
that even were the event suitable for a country with devout Muslims, the
timing was totally inappropriate. Nigeria is a country where, for a long
time now, ethnic tensions have been near the boiling point for a variety
of reasons — economic, tribal, political and so on. With every interest
group ready to burn, kill and destroy “the other” at the smallest
excuse, it is only the most thoughtless who will be foolish enough to
provide that excuse. The organizers of the pageant have done that. It must be hoped that those who perpetrated this awful mistake will be
properly pilloried for their error. Meanwhile, the main organizers are
hastily leaving behind them the carnage they have created and taking their
circus off to London. There, it will hopefully be treated with the
disinterest, if not contempt, it deserves. Indeed, it may not be too much
to expect that advertisers and sponsors of this unedifying event will
decide that enough is enough and withdraw their financial support for the
contest. It would be nice to believe that this cynical exercise has come
to an end. It perverts the whole meaning of the word “contest” which
at its highest incarnation is a genuine competition between athletes and a
measure of sporting excellence. It has nothing to do with women parading
around and telling a bunch of arbitrarily chosen judges about their
hobbies and their ambition to be a hairdresser. The consequences of this rubbish are normally disgust and boredom.
Unfortunately in Nigeria, they have been a very great deal more serious.
And no less unfortunately, it is clearly too much to expect that the
cynical and ignorant promoters of this garbage, should feel any shame at
all.
How the West fuels global
terrorism LONDON, 23 November 2002 — This time last year, supporters of George
Bush’s war on terror were in euphoric mood. As one Taleban stronghold
after another fell to the US-backed Northern Alliance, they hailed the
advance as a decisive blow to the authors of the Sept. 11 atrocities. The
critics and doom-mongers had been confounded, cheerleaders crowed. Kites
were flying again, music was playing and women were throwing off their
burkas with joyful abandon. As the US president demanded Osama Bin Laden “dead or alive”,
government officials on both sides of the Atlantic whispered that they
were less than 48 hours from laying hands on the Al-Qaeda leader. By
destroying the network’s Afghan bases and its Taleban sponsors,
supporters of the war argued, the Americans and their friends had ripped
the heart out of the beast. Washington would now begin to address Muslim
and Arab grievances by fast-tracking the establishment of a Palestinian
state. London even published a rollcall of shame of journalists they
claimed had been proved wrong by a hundred days of triumph. And in the UK
Parliament, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw ridiculed members of Parliament
(MPs) from his own Labour Party for suggesting that the US and Britain
might still be fighting in Afghanistan 12 months down the line. One year on, the crowing has long since faded away; reality has sunk
in. After six months of multiplying attacks on US, Australian and European
targets, civilian and military — in Tunisia, Pakistan, Kuwait, Russia,
Jordan, Yemen, the US and Indonesia — Western politicians are having to
face the fact that they are losing their war on "terror. In Britain,
the prime minister has taken to warning of the “painful price” that
the country will have to pay to defeat those who are “inimical to all we
stand for”, while leaks about the risk of chemical or biological attacks
have become ever more lurid. After a year of US military operations in
Afghanistan and around the world, the CIA Director George Tenet had to
concede that the threat from Al-Qaeda and associated jihadist groups was
as serious as before Sept. 11. “They’ve reconstituted, they are coming
after us,” he said. In other words, the global US onslaught had been a complete failure —
at least as far as dealing with non-state terrorism was concerned. Tom
Daschle, the Democrats’ leader in the Senate, was even more brutal.
Summing up a litany of unmet objectives in the US confrontation with
militant Islamism, he asked: “By what measure can we say this has been
successful?” But most galling of all has been the authentication of the
latest taped message from Bin Laden himself, promising bloody revenge for
the deaths of the innocent in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan. This was
the man whose capture or killing was, after all, the first objective of
Bush’s war. And yet, along with the Taleban leader and one-eyed
motorbiker Mulla Omar, the mastermind of America’s humiliation remains
free. Meanwhile, in Afghanistan itself, the record is just as dismal. By
using the heroin-financed gangsters of the Northern Alliance to overthrow
the Taleban regime and pursue Al-Qaeda remnants ever since, the US has
handed over most of the country to the same war criminals who devastated
Afghanistan in the early 1990s. In Kabul, the US puppet President Hamid
Karzai can rely on foreign troops to prop up his fragile authority. There,
and in a few other urban centers, some girls’ schools have reopened and
the worst manifestations of the Taleban’s grotesque oppression of women
have gone. But in much of what is once again the opium capital of the world, the
return of the warlords has meant harsh political repression, lawlessness,
mass rape and widespread torture, the bombing or closure of schools, as
well as Taleban-style policing of women’s dress and behavior. The
systematic use by Ismail Khan, who runs much of Western Afghanistan with
US support, of electric shock torture, arbitrary arrests and whippings to
crush dissent is set out in a new Human Rights Watch report. Khan was
nevertheless described by the US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
recently as a “thoughtful” and “appealing” person. His counterpart
in the north, Gen. Dostam, has in turn just been accused by the UN of
torturing witnesses to his troops’ murder of thousands of Taleban
prisoners late last year, when he was working closely with US special
forces. The death toll exacted for this “liberation” can only be estimated.
But a consensus is growing that around 3,500 Afghan civilians were killed
by US bombing (which included the large-scale use of depleted uranium
weapons), with up to 10,000 combatants killed and many more deaths from
cold and hunger as a result of the military action. Now, long after the
war was supposed to be over, the US 82nd airborne division is reported to
be alienating the population in the south and east with relentless but
largely fruitless raids and detentions, while mortar and rocket attacks on
US bases are now taking place at least three times a week. As Gen. Richard
Myers, chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, puts it, the US military
campaign in Afghanistan has “lost momentum”. All this has been the inevitable product of the central choice made
last autumn, which was to opt for a mainly military solution to the
challenge of terrorism. That was a recipe for failure. By their nature,
guerrilla campaigns which have deep social roots and draw on a widespread
sense of injustice — as militant Islamist groups do, regardless of the
obscurantism of their ideology — cannot be defeated militarily. And as
the war on "terror" has increasingly become a war to enforce US
global power, it has only intensified the appeal of “asymmetric
warfare” to the powerless. The grievances Al-Qaeda is able to feed on
throughout the Muslim world were once again spelled out in Bin Laden’s
latest edict. But there is little sign of any weakening of the wilful
Western refusal to address seriously the causes of "terrorism."
Thus, during the past year, the US has armed and bolstered Pakistan and
the Central Asian dictatorships, supported Putin’s ongoing devastation
of Chechnya, continued to bomb and blockade Iraq at huge human cost,
established new US bases across the Muslim world and, most recklessly of
all, provided every necessary cover for Ariel Sharon’s bloody rampages
through the occupied Palestinian territories. In most of this, despite
Tony Blair’s muted appeals for a new Middle East peace conference,
Britain has played the role of faithful lieutenant. Now, even as “phase one” of its war on terror has been seen to have
failed, the US shows every sign of preparing to launch phase two: its
long-planned invasion and occupation of Iraq. Perhaps some of the
intensity of the current warnings about terrorist threats is intended to
help soften up public opinion for an unpopular war. But what is certain
about such an act of aggression is that it will fuel Islamist
"terrorism" throughout the world and make attacks on those
countries which support it much more likely. If such outrages take place
in Britain, there can no longer be any surprise or mystery about why we
have been attacked, no point in asking why they hate us. Of course, it
wouldn’t be the innocents who were killed or injured who would be to
blame. But by throwing Britain’s weight behind a flagrantly unjust war,
our political leaders would certainly be held responsible for endangering
their own people.
Crunch
time for Blair
Al-Ahram Weekly, 11/21/02 Leaving the destiny of national liberation struggles to the mercy of the new US paradigm for understanding terrorism is ill-advised. Confirmation of the authenticity of Osama Bin Laden's voice on the audio-tape broadcast by Al- Jazeera television network last week, in which he said, "as you kill you will be killed", has sent shock waves through Western capitals and put Europe and the United States on edge. Bin Laden's comments seem to have come as a rude awakening -- a reminder that he and his network are still alive and active. Perhaps, though, speculation by intelligence agencies across the globe that Al-Qa'eda may be preparing for a new round of blitzkrieg attacks has contributed to the sense of fear. The series of security alerts issued every other day might also be playing a part in the general nervousness. However, for one man's voice to suddenly cast such a gloomy spell over the world even though a fierce war on terrorism is in full swing suggests that people suspect Al-Qa'eda and its associates have undergone an ominous transmutation. The intensity of the US-led war against terrorism is probably breathing new life into Bin Laden's advocacy while transforming the global phenomenon of terrorism into a global ideology. Unlike the first anniversary of 11 September, the first anniversary of the bombing of Afghanistan passed without much fanfare. More than 1,500 Al-Qa'eda suspects are in detention camps, under investigation or on trial. More cells are being uncovered, more operatives are being apprehended and more plots are being thwarted. Even so, it seems that lethal operations are being hatched in many locations: from Afghanistan to Yemen, from Tunisia to Moscow, from Bali to Kuwait and from Pakistan to Chechnya. Intelligence agency officials tell reporters that Al- Qa'eda is still intact, especially in south-east Asia, and the fight against terrorism is far from over. In the words of US Secretary of State Colin Powell, when he introduced the 22nd annual report on terrorism to Congress in May, "The terrorist threat is global in scope, many-faceted and determined." But it seems there is more to global terrorism than meets the eyes of those fighting it. In this respect, the sympathetic reaction to Bin Laden's tape by Arab viewers who were polled by both Al-Jazeera and CNN, was an eye opener. A female viewer from Saudi Arabia offered supplication on behalf of Bin Laden, the most wanted man on earth on whose head there is a $25 million reward. On the so-called Arab street, Bin Laden and Al-Qa'eda are increasingly being seen through the prism of Israel's brutal war of occupation against the Palestinians and US plans to invade Iraq. Some Arabs identify with Bin Laden and his collaborators because the US-Israeli perspective equates Palestinian resistance with terrorism. After the tragic events of 11 September, the US has cobbled together a coalition against terrorism. It consists in part of countries fighting political, ethnic or religious minorities in their own backyards, as well as other half-hearted allies, who were either lured or intimidated into joining the club. In designing the grand scheme to fight terrorism, President George W Bush has also blurred the dividing line between terrorism and national resistance. "You are either with us, or with the terrorists", he told nations and governments who saw the issue as being more complex and he made 11 September the litmus test. Under his definition, the decades-long dialogue that sought to curb terrorism, while at the same time safeguard the right to struggle for national liberation, was lost. At times, the dialogue was frustrating and inconclusive, but over the years it produced 12 international conventions against terrorism. In order to legitimise the war on terrorism, the Bush administration had to delegitimise armed resistance for national liberation. This turned out to be a source of gratification for a number of countries that had historically, and paradoxically, been some of the staunchest supporters of the national liberation struggle. They, too, jumped on the bandwagon to benefit from the general definition of terrorism in tackling some domestic problems and insurgencies. National liberation and the armed resistance that often goes with it were abandoned by its allies and left out in the cold to fend for itself. In a world of increasingly limited choices, the Palestinians, the Chechens, the Kashmiris, the southern Philippines Muslims of Mindanao and the Uighurs of the Xinjiang region in north- western China, among others, could not join the anti-terrorism front and delegitimise their own causes. They had, by definition, to lie on the other side of the fence and play the enemy. So it came to pass that anyone who fired a shot against a crushing power of occupation was classified as a terrorist. The collapse of the Soviet Union and its Third World policies, and the compromised Non- aligned Movement, briefly left the international scene with a power vacuum that the United States soon rushed to fill. As the resulting unipolar international system successfully bridged the power gap, it inevitably created a lopsided balance of power. So, the destiny of national liberation, was left at the mercy of the new paradigm that was dictated by the international superpower. While assuming this position is an awesome international responsibility, the new superpower is often motivated by a narrow nationalist agenda, such as the pressures of the ascendancy of the new right-wing, or by unholy regional alliances of which Israel is the prime example. In this iniquitous world, national resistance had little choice but to band together as a coalition of the underdogs. It faces the impossible mission of counterbalancing the raw power of the mighty superpower in an unconventional war. It is historically true, and politically justified, that national resistance includes the use of terror. This is equally true of the American Revolution. There have also been many examples of state terrorism against civilian populations, often supported and abetted by the United States, particularly in Latin America. This vicious circle need not be the new global equation. The US and its allies, while defending their interests, may do well to revive the dialogue about the root causes of the phenomenon of terrorism. The world views 9/11 from a different perspective, something the US and its most ardent allies may wish to understand. * The writer is a former correspondent for Al- Ahram in Washington, DC. He also served as director of United Nations Radio and Television in New York
By Omayma Abdel-Latif Al-Ahram Weekly, 11/21/02 The outlawed Muslim Brotherhood seems likely to conduct an orderly transfer of power within its ranks. Eighty-three-year-old Ma'moun El- Hodeibi looked confident as he stood, flanked by two younger members of the Muslim Brotherhood, welcoming guests to the group's annual iftar -- which took place at a Heliopolis five-star hotel on Sunday. The traditional ritual brought together what at one point seemed to be a ceaseless flow of "brothers" and "sisters" from across the country. It also attracted a large media contingent. After all, this was the second "show of strength" staged by the outlawed group in less than two days. The first was the funeral of the group's supreme guide Mustafa Mashhour, which took place on Sunday. According to police, 50,000 people had attended. The Brotherhood estimated the turnout at somewhere between 200,000 to nearly half a million strong. Despite the large number of attendees, however, no banners were raised, and not a single slogan shouted out. Instead, only hands were raised, holding the Qur'an. In fact, the event was so orderly that there was hardly any intervention by the security forces on hand. The level of organisation that characterised both the funeral and iftar led some commentators to wonder about the "true size of the Islamist trend in comparison to other domestic political forces". The brothers' successful show of unity was not sufficent, however, to put to rest growing concerns over a possible power struggle within the ranks of the 74-year- old group. El-Hodeibi, the acting supreme guide who is favoured to lead the group, was once again under pressure to dismiss news of "a leadership crisis". He reiterated that the shift in the group's leadership would be achieved via what he described as "the most orderly transition in the history of the Muslim Brotherhood". As El-Hodeibi told members of the group during his iftar speech, "in the last few days we have been the target of a smear campaign that talked about dissension, conflicts and differences within our ranks -- but rest assured, these are illusions and wishful thinking. For what holds us together is unity. Our traditions and laws will have the ultimate authority in deciding our affairs," he said. Observers described El-Hodeibi's iftar speech as a message that was intended -- on the one hand -- to close the door to any further speculation about the new leadership, and the mechanisms of this "orderly transition", while emphasising at the same time that he was now the man at the helm. This view point was confirmed by Essam El-Eryan, secretary-general of the Doctors Syndicate, and a member of the brotherhood's Shura council. He told Al-Ahram Weekly on Monday that, "El-Hodeibi will indeed be named the group's sixth supreme guide... There are no other contenders for this post." El-Eryan explained that there was a near consensus within the ranks of Muslim Brothers that El-Hodeibi was the best man for the job. All that remained to make it official, he added, were some "procedural measures" which would take a week to ten days to finish, "depending on circumstances" -- a reference to the government ban imposed on the group's meetings. According to a Brotherhood organisational statutes issued in 1982, the supreme guide should be chosen from among the 13 members who comprise the group's Maktab Al-Irshad, or General Guidance Bureau (GGB), the body responsible for formulating policies and running the group's activities. For this procedure to take place, the GGB will have to convene within 30 days. According to one senior member, however, such a meeting is not likely to take place because of growing fears that it would raise the government's ire if held, and probably give it a pretext for more clamp downs on Brotherhood members. El-Hodeibi's appointment will come as no surprise. He has occupied the group's second most important post -- its deputy supreme guide -- since 1986. He has also served as the group's spokesman for most of that time. Views are divided, however, on how deeply the change in the top position will reflect on the group's structure as a whole. Some analysts say that no sweeping generational shifts are to be expected. El- Eryan said that there will be no changes in the membership of the GGB, most of whom are known to be El-Hodeibi loyalists. Others expect that El-Hodeibi's appointment will have to meet a tide of rising expectations from the group's younger cadres. Speculation is rife that a compromise is likely to be reached whereby the deputy supreme guide will be named from the ranks of the so-called '70s generation, with 51-year old Abdel-Moneim Abul- Futuh being named by numerous outside sources as the top candidate for the post. Brotherhood member Mukhtar Nouh believes that this view holds water. "There is already a balance of power in the GGB where almost half of its members belong to the group's young wing," Nouh said. When approached by the Weekly, Abul- Futuh refused to confirm or deny the speculation, saying that only the supreme guide should decide who his deputy will be. As a way of avoiding any talk of a schism between the group's old and young cadres, other Brotherhood sources disclosed that there is a near consensus among senior members to name two younger members to the deputy post. The names include Abul-Futuh, Mohamed Habib, Khairi El-Shater and Mohamed Ali Beshr. El-Hodeibi himself declined to discuss the issue, saying that, "it was too early to decide." Some see this decision as El- Hodeibi's first test. "El-Hodeibi will have to handle this issue delicately because there is the living example of the Al-Wasat group, which comprised some of the Brotherhood's most pragmatic and dynamic young men who rebelled against an authoritarian system that did not reflect their aspirations," Rifaat Sid- Ahmed, an expert on Islamist movements, told the Weekly. This view was shared by Diaa Rashwan of the Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, who contends that the group is missing one more opportunity for change. "The Brotherhood needs to undergo structural reform to allow the younger generation -- which comprises the bulk of the rank-and-file -- to take over senior positions. The current system lacks new vision and the political creativity [necessary] to deal with current realities," he said. If Rashwan is right, then the leadership crisis would be exacerbated further by the group's internal mechanisms of succession. In response to this argument, El- Eryan said that the change should come from within. As part of the group's younger cadres, El-Eryan believes this sort of change is already taking place. El-Eryan also dismissed fears that El- Hodeibi would rule the group as a despot. "The group is not ruled by one individual," he said. "This might not be clear to most people who think that the Muslim Brotherhood is run by a few men in secrecy. Despite the government ban imposed on us, which undermines our organisational capabilities, we do have institutions that work effectively and efficiently," El-Eryan said. What remains certain, though, is that El- Hodeibi does not have an easy road ahead of him, and that his leadership abilities will be put to many tests. At the same time, major departures in the group's policies are not very likely. During his iftar speech, El-Hodeibi outlined what many thought was a future plan of action for the group. The bulk of it dealt with the group's relationship with the state in the days to come. Political reform was at the heart of any rapprochement, El-Hodeibi said, oscillating between criticism of the government and a desire to be recognised by it. El-Hodeibi held the government responsible for the "state of political stagnation that has afflicted the country for the past two decades". He mentioned emergency laws, military trials, parliamentary elections, as well as soaring rates of unemployment, as examples. He reiterated the Brotherhood's commitment to democracy and political reform. "During the past 20 years we have not moved one inch forward to develop the political system," El-Hodeibi told the gathering. "It seems that we are going backward, because during those years there were times when we have had more freedoms than we do now." El-Hodeibi made a few statements that were guaranteed to trigger the government's wrath. Referring to Mashhour's funeral, he boasted that everyone had "seen the crowds which came from across the country. [And] they say the Brotherhood is a small group", he added with irony. He also referred to "the many crises the group has been through", arguing that the brotherhood has survived systematic attempts to destroy its rank and file. "They assassinated Hassan Al-Banna, the group's founder, and thought they had destroyed the Brotherhood. During the revolution, many of us were put in prison, tortured and killed, and again everybody thought the Brotherhood had vanished. But we have become more powerful -- not only in Egypt or the Arab and Islamic world, but in Europe, the US, and even in Australia," El-Hodeibi told the gathering. It was the first time he had explicitly referred to the group's international reach, a taboo issue on which the Brotherhood has kept a low profile in fear of antagonising the state. These fiery statements, however, were soon followed by what many observers saw as reconciliatory remarks towards the government -- a style which has become something of a Hodeibi trademark. "We extend our hands to the rulers of Egypt with whom we want to maintain a transparent relationship," he said. He urged the government to "open a channel of communication with us, instead of shunning us. We are a mainstream movement, and we want a dialogue with the government, a dialogue in which neither party imposes its vision or agenda, a dialogue for the interest of the country and the people. We are a moderate movement which makes no claim to monopolise the truth, a movement which has become a political reality that can no longer be ignored," El-Hodeibi said.
By Gamal Nkrumah Al-Ahram Weekly, 11/21/02 Cairo is a megalopolis where crazed drivers honk incessantly as pedestrians choke on fumes. But its indomitable people refuse to be cowed by either traffic or throngs Crowds are for Cairo what the ravens are to the Tower of London. And no more so than in the rush hour before iftar in the month of Ramadan, when teeming millions head for home to break their fast at sundown. Cairo is not just big. It is among the most densely populated cities in the world. The estimated 20 million daytime Cairenes live and work in an area of merely 214 square kilometres. In contrast, Oslo is a city of some 500,000 people living in an area of 242 square kilometres. London, with 12 million people, has a land area of 625 square kilometres. Drive from Helwan to Heliopolis -- from one end of town to another -- on a Friday morning and you'll realise how tiny the city is in comparison with the world's other great cities. Cairo is no island, like Bombay, Hong Kong, Singapore or Manhattan. But, since time immemorial, Egyptians have preferred to live by the banks of the River Nile and abhorred the surrounding desert. As such Cairo is lean, with a tiny waistline around the downtown area. Athletically built, it is tall and long- limbed. The broad shoulders span several sprawling suburbs; Shubra to the north, Heliopolis to the northeast, and Nasr City spilling east into the desert. Cairo, alas, has no head. No body obeys orders, even though everybody pretends to. Everyone is a law unto themselves, and the streets are chaotic. Cairenes jostle for space among nondescript apartment complexes and concrete slab buildings, on traffic-clogged thoroughfares, and in overcrowded markets. Bustling with activity, even during the wee hours of the night, Cairo's old Islamic contours are not obscured by the new outcrop of skyscrapers. The metropolis is entangled in contradictions. Mud brick hovels face towering skyscrapers across the River Nile. Shacks rub shoulders with plush apartment blocks. Cairo is a city that defies contemporary urban planning techniques for survey, analysis, design and implementation. The resulting mess creates three distinct but related hazards: environmental, social, and health (mental and the rest of it). Cairenes fortify themselves with a matchless sense of humour, notorious throughout the Arab world for its sagaciousness and vivacity. Cairo is a city that you could never get bored of. All the more so because the city is replete with unorthodox juxtapositions: a religious Muslim woman wearing the black niqab (covering body and face), complete with gloves in the sweltering summer heat, obviously wants to avoid the touch of a man's handshake. Yet, at one point or another, she will have to contend with the moral implications of sardine-packed public transportation. (The Cairo metro has set aside a women car to minimise the undesirable prospects). Al-Qahirah (city triumphant or victorious) as Al-Mu'izz Li Din Allah Al-Fatimi, its founder, named her a millennium ago, is a true megalopolis, in a league of its own. "It is the metropolis of the universe," pronounced the Arab historian Ibn-Khaldun in 1382. To its inhabitants, Cairo (or Masr) is umm al-dunya, mother of the world. Indeed, Cairo feels much bigger than it actually is, because it is bustling, teeming with people who, in spite of hazardous pollution and a national predilection for television soaps, enjoy hanging out, shopping, eating or playing backgammon in the countless cafés. Unfortunately, Cairo penalises pedestrians. "You are a nonentity if you don't own a car," complained one Cairene pedestrian after a life-threatening crossing of a busy thoroughfare. Crossing the street on a red light is not always safe. Few drivers pay much attention to the traffic lights, unless a traffic warden is on duty. In Cairo, jaywalking is a necessary, though unsavoury, adventure. If you do not cross while traffic is moving, you can be stuck on the pavements endlessly. Prime property stretches along the Nile, where many of Cairo's five-star hotels and a welter of towering skyscrapers are clustered. The area is also the city's most inexpensive leisure venue and in the evenings swarms with the promenading crowds. How about peeling away from the press of the throngs in the bustling downtown to the safe haven of the outlying suburbs? They are just as crammed with people and vehicles. Cairo's oppressive summer heat offers the perfect excuse to hang about in the air-conditioned malls. And we're talking about nine months of summer: March to November. The shopping malls of both downtown and suburban Cairo are busiest in the summer holiday season. Nasr City is a concrete reminder of the Open Door policy first launched in 1976. It is pretentious and featureless, and has an inflated sense of self-importance. Nasr (victory) City sprouted in the desert, soon after the 1973 war, and is where new money is poured, and paraded. Its broad avenues are invariably clogged with loud adolescents in spanking new cars, honking hysterically to attract the attention of their paramours, perhaps, or just for the hell of it. Nasr City, with its ugly shopping malls and drab apartment blocks, symbolises the sheer triumph of intemperate consumerism. The malls are a minefield of must-haves, with rampant bargain-hunters snatching every sale item, and idle youth loitering aimlessly about. And most of the items on sale aren't up to much, to be honest. Heliopolis is more refined: older money, more tastefully put on display. Its boulevards are immense. And its landmarks both inexplicable and colossal. But Heliopolis, too, can be hellish. Endless traffic jams, especially around the favourite haunts of its well-heeled inhabitants, and congested back streets, can be frightfully unpleasant. Helwan, at the southern tip of Cairo, has a sad story. Decades ago, this used to be a fashionable winter spa resort. The once flourishing resort has since wilted and withered with industrial pollution. The air is acrid with toxic and exhaust fumes. Steel and cement factories relentlessly belch their poisons. The rich have moved out and the dilapidated Japanese garden, spa and other former tourist attractions are a sad testament to Helwan's fall from grace. Upmarket Maadi is sandwiched between two of Cairo's most deprived districts: Tura and Dar Al-Salam. Dar Al- Salam is a sprawling run-down area and perhaps the most crowded of Cairo's low-income districts. Its estimated one million inhabitants stoically suffer the appalling sanitary, social and economic conditions. Its streets -- many unpaved -- are narrow and seething with humanity. No trace here of the charm that exudes the souqs, bazaars and back streets of Islamic Cairo. Millions of villagers from the surrounding countryside and the far-flung provinces of Upper Egypt and the Delta make a living of sorts in Cairo, and stay on for years on end without being officially registered as residents. Refugees from neighbouring countries, especially the war-torn and economically-ruined Sudan, have also sought refuge in Cairo. Commuters cram the city during the day and Cairenes take to the streets at night. Some loiter about in their local neighbourhoods. Others escape their high-density zones to the downtown shopping district or head for Corniche, the riverside thoroughfare. Considering that some quarters of the city have population densities exceeding 20,000 persons per square kilometre, there is no point in trying to escape the crowds. Even in the middle of the Nile, the barges that ply the river and ferry passengers to and from the various suburbs and districts of Cairo's twin city Giza, across the river on the western bank of the Nile, are often overcrowded and overloaded with food and goods, sometimes animals. Along the Corniche, carriages drawn by horses on slippery asphalt offer a comical interpretation of what is supposed to be pleasure rides for tourists. Brave inhabitants occasionally try to escape the city by venturing into one of the amusement parks ringing the city, Dream Park and Magic Land. As a result, these could get, particularly on weekends and public holidays, busier than the city itself. As an alternative, one may be tempted to seek the calm of the surrounding rural areas. There, you'll get more nature, perhaps, but often you will also find yourself in the middle of crowds. A short trip by boat to Al-Qanater Al- Khayria, the barrages and promenade to the north of Cairo, will give you a basic idea about the population density in the lush Nile Delta. Cairo can be overwhelming for newcomers. Most of the people you see on the streets of Cairo are peasants or have village roots. Many were not born in Cairo and still harbour strong attachments to their villages of origin. Rural mannerisms linger on in the city, and will have to be tolerated. This is not a place for the half-hearted. It is difficult to escape the prying eyes in a city where, for the overwhelming majority of its population, privacy is a commodity that's hard to come by. When not outright inquisitive, Cairenes can be loud. To visitors with an uncharitable disposition or in an irritable mood, the locals would seem meddlesome and feisty. It is not just the throng of people that gets in the way. Everything comes in big dozes: the lights, the sounds, the scents, and the resilience that borders on stubbornness. Right now, somewhere in the congested streets, there is a cart-drawing donkey desperately trying to overtake the flashy cars. Half the time, it succeeds.
Opinions expressed in various sections are the sole responsibility of their authors and they may not represent http://www.aljazeerah.info |