Beheading in the name of religion

"It is a very serious matter that Islam and Muslims should be constantly linked with stories of massacre and excoriation. But what is more provocative is the silence that follows such misdeeds on the part of Muslim religious authorities, intellectuals and guardians of Islamic values," wrote Hilmi al Asmar, in the Jordanian daily Addustour. The writer said that the reports circulated last Friday of the beheading of seven people in Somalia - for being "Christian" and "spies"- by "hardline Islamists" from al Shabaab, a Somali youth movement reported to be "affiliated with al Qa'eda", is likely to be true but news agencies often resort to "tacit", "unprofessional" and "biased" conduct.

The United Nations high commissioner for human rights, Navanethem Pillay, was perhaps the only voice who has spoken up against those summary trials. Ms Pillay decried illegal death sentences by stoning, beheading and dismemberment that were conducted in areas under the control of rogue Somalis. "But what kind of Islam are these young 'Islamists' trying to propagate?" Mr al Asmar asked. What has happened in Somalia is just as awful as the carnage in mosques that has been witnessed frequently in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. "It is bloodshed in the name of God, but God is innocent of it," he said. "Why isn't there one Muslim voice to weigh in on this sordid situation?"

A new concept has emerged over the last few years in the field of strategic studies: "soft power". According to Abdullah K al Shayji, dean of the American Studies department at Kuwait University, the term mainly refers to criteria such as living standards, civil liberties, tolerance, culture, sport and industry, which earn a country a role-model status.

"In our region, we can say that Turkey represents a soft power," he wrote in the Emirati daily Al Ittihad. "It is re-emerging, propelled by the 'new Ottomans', to compete for leadership in the Middle East." Turkey's mediation efforts between Syria and Israel and its recent bid to facilitate talks between the US and Iran say a lot about its diplomatic shrewdness. It is also gradually entering into an economy-based alliance with the Gulf Cooperation Council.

In 2005, the GCC states and Turkey signed a framework agreement for co-operation in food safety, investment, oil and tourism with a view to reaching a free-trade agreement in the future. The current Turkish-GCC strategic rapprochement was further bolstered by last week's meeting in Istanbul, which resulted in the adoption of a road map for political, economic, security and defence collaboration, al Shayji wrote. "This alliance with Turkey will benefit us, boost our capacities, diversify our options and increase our security."

Aside from the complications that usually prolong the formation of a new Lebanese government, the current negotiations to set up a cabinet headed by Saad al Hariri, the leader of the majority coalition in parliament, have larger implications than just the process to share power, commented Nabil Boumounsef in the Lebanese daily Annahar.

The three major blocs taking part in the talks - the March 14 alliance, the Hizbollah-Aoun opposition and the president's office - are not simply concerned about the distribution of portfolios, but are eyeing an overarching political settlement bearing significant resemblance to a constitutional "procedural pact", to see their interests through to a four-year deal. Though agreeing in principle to a national unity government, the majority deems two critical points as non-negotiable: first, that the composition of the cabinet reflect the electorate's will; and second, that the "obstructive third"- a third of the cabinet possessing veto power - does not affect the executive body as it has so often done. The opposition, however, is set to secure enough portfolios to constitute a veto unless it is guaranteed a voice on executive matters. As for the president's office, it seeks to restore its status on top of a government that may well mark a new era in Lebanese politics.

"Once again, Tehran averts a nuclear crisis with the West because of a renewed 'pardon period', which both Europeans and Americans were forced to admit during the G8 summit as they realised that the military option against Iran would lead to sheer disaster," wrote Mohammed S al Husseini in the pan-Arab daily Al Quds al Arabi.

For his part, the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is readying a host of new proposals for the resumption of talks with the West. This time the Iranian proposals are believed to encompass all outstanding matters in the region, not just Iran's nuclear programme. It is still uncertain whether the US dialogue has the upper-hand over similar European initiatives to galvanise relations with Iran, but this much can be asserted: "Tehran has received indications from Washington over the last few days confirming the latter's intention to jump start an otherwise intermittent bilateral dialogue," the writer said.

The release of the five Iranian diplomats last Friday who had been held in US civilian camps in Iraq for years, attests to the earnestness of the American diplomatic overtures. Yet there is no telling what will happen once this new "pardon period" is over. * Digest compiled by Achraf A El Bahi [e-mail]