Punishment for hate speech is too lenient

There are many haters of Islam and Muslims in the West, but very few of them stoop as low as the Dutch MP Geert Wilders, says the columnist Mazen Hammad in an article for the Qatari newspaper Al Watan.

There are many haters of Islam and Muslims in the West, but very few of them stoop as low as the Dutch MP Geert Wilders, the man who produced of a documentary film entitled Fitna and who describes the Quran as a terrorist book, says the columnist Mazen Hammad in an article for the Qatari newspaper Al Watan.

Mr Wilders, the leader of the Party of Freedom, is on trial in his country at present for instigating hatred and discrimination against Muslims. However, the maximum penalty stated by law for his crime is no more than one year of imprisonment and a fine of $10,000. "Such a lenient penalty doesn't constitute a successful deterrent that would set a precedent for those who support Wilders's ideas," he writes.

Mr Wilders has led a campaign to halt Muslim immigration to the Netherlands for years and to ban mosque building. He even called for imposing a tax on veils, which he describes as "rags that pollute the Dutch scenery". Just recently, he spoke in New York on the 9/11 commemoration day, where he incited people to oppose plans to build an Islamic cultural centre. Dutch prosecution was hesitant to summon Mr Wilders to trial on the grounds that his opposition to Islam is only a matter of creed, but isn't comparing Islam to Nazism a blatant insult to the religion? "We look forward for a more severe penalty for such hate crimes, not only in the Netherlands but the world over."

Will Ahmadinejad be a risk for Lebanon? 

One week from now, the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is supposed to throw stones from Lebanon over the Israeli border in a political propaganda gesture. But his visit is important and courageous, as throwing stones at a shooting distance from Israeli guns is a dangerous adventure, says the columnist Abdulrahman al Rashed for the pan-Arab newspaper Asharq Al Awsat.

The Israelis wouldn't dare target the Iranian president, or any other leader visiting Lebanon. Despite this fact, the visit isn't an easy ride. Iran's enemies are many. It is expected that Hizbollah - not the Lebanese security forces - wukk be providing Mr Ahmadinejad's security for his first official visit to Lebanon. After all, Iran has spent millions of dollars to arm and train the group and it trusts its capabilities.

The real fear isn't for the Iranian president, but for the Lebanese people. They are the ones that would have to pay the price of any escalation following the visit. Mr Ahmadinejad doesn't call on Lebanon as other presidents have to show their political and financial support as did Qatar, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. He is going to proclaim the country as the "first line of defence against Israel" and to solidify the confrontational mentality that turned Lebanon into a proxy battlefield for decades.

What kind of a republic would South Sudan be? 

Without a shadow of a doubt, the South of Sudan is going to vote for secession from the North in the forthcoming referendum in January. But what kind of state would this new African republic be? Ahmed Amorabi, a columnist with the Emirati newspaper Al Bayan, said there was a key factor that must be taken into account when trying to gauge whether the prospective republic would be "sustainably livable".

And that factor is: political allegiances in the South are governed by tribal affiliations. This basic fact is of crucial significance given that the ruling Sudan People's Liberation Movement represents but one single tribe, the Dinka, according to the writer. "The Dinka may be the largest tribe in southern Sudan, but the other tribes combined represent the majority of the southern population." In fact, since the South achieved autonomy by virtue of the 2005 peace treaty between the central government in Khartoum and the South's capital, Juba, the Dinka leadership practised a discriminatory policy against other tribes, leading to a wave of discontent among marginalised tribes in various parts of the South, occasionally involving into bloody clashes.

"Sure, there will be a southern republic, but it will be a state with a frazzled fabric; it will be the site of internal and external conflicts, beginning at its very birthday," the writer concluded.

Iraq's sovereignty hangs in the balance 

The Iraqi government is going through a period of fluctuations, concessions, deals, and Iranian interference, which means that the next Iraqi prime minister's powers would be controlled and restricted, says Tareq al Homayed, the editor-in-chief of pan-Arab newspaper Asharq Al Awsat.

In fact, the alliance that is supposed to churn up the much-anticipated government isn't based on mutual interests, but rather on pressures and foreign interference. This is evidenced by Moqtada al Sadr's statement announcing his support for Nouri al Maliki for another term, where he admits that his decision was the outcome of political pressure. Iraq's next PM would be a lame duck, for he would have to agree to many concessions in exchange for the term, which would debilitate the position for the short and long terms.

Concessions that are made for purposes of remaining in power rather than prioritising national interests and establishing a government that truly represents all Iraqi factions would weaken the country's role in the region; Iraq would miss its chance at independence if it falls under direct Iranian influence.

Strangely enough, the US is expressing its concern for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to Lebanon next week, while they ignore Iran's trespasses in Iraq.

* Digest compiled by Racha Makarem