The French president Nicholas Sarkozy is disgruntled by the fact that the European Union was not invited to participate in the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, as he told the Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak at the Elysee Palace prior to his trip to Washington, wrote Randa Takieddine in an opinion article for pan-Arab daily Al Hayat. Mr Sarkozy has every right to be furious since the EU is one of Israel's biggest suppliers and plays a considerable role in supporting the Palestinian state. The question here, however, is who benefits from such an absence?
In fact, the exclusion of the Quartet's main members from these negotiations increases sceptics' pessimism about their outcome, as they fear that Washington would forsake the quartet's principles that were agreed upon last March in Moscow. Among these principles are the illegitimacy of settlements, the boundaries of the Palestinian state and the Jerusalem issue. Mr Netanyahu, on his part, prefers that Europe not be included in the direct talks since Mr Sarkozy had made it clear before the Israeli Knesset that Jerusalem must be the capital of both states. Europe and Russia's absence indicates that the Obama-led US administration is back to assume its traditional role of a superpower that holds the reins with special attention to the interests of Israel.
The Muslim faith is the subject of distortion and defamation campaigns in various parts of the western world by groups of radical extremists, declared the pan-Arab daily Al Quds al Arabi in its editorial.
The Dove Missionary Church in Florida has called upon the public to burn copies of the holy Quran on the anniversary of September 11 as an protest against Islam. Despite waves of dissent, the church is deliberately provoking the world's one and a half billion Muslims. To protest against a terrorist attack is one thing, but to intentionally offend followers of a religion is another. The former is legitimate whereas the latter is a criminal act that serves none but extremists. It could lead to bloody conflicts and vengeful actions that threaten to be more serious than the September 11 incidents.
Such provocative behaviour must stop. Continuous instigation must be halted through explicit laws that protect Muslims and Islam similar to the laws shielding Jews and criminalising anti-Semitism or any denial of the Holocaust. Banning the infamous "Burn a Quran Day" and protecting Islam from slander requires the collective efforts of all religions. This is an extremist act that goes against the principles of all. The dissemination of hatred jeopardises the western world's values and perhaps its stability.
Britain's former prime minister Tony Blair stirred a tempest of indignation that greets him wherever he goes now after the publication of his memoir A Journey, which might better have been entitled A Calamitous Journey, commented Rajeh al Khouri in the Lebanese daily Annahar. As if the former prime minister wasn't satisfied with his standing title of "Bush's poodle" which the British press had given him, he had to stun an appalled Britain with a 700-page memoir teeming with political and social frivolity.
The former resident of 10 Downing Streets lengthily recounts his intimate adventures with his wife and his murky relationship with his successor Gordon Brown, which matters not at all to us. What's most alarming is his confession that his understanding of Islam was so superficial at the time of September 11 attacks that he found himself prone to adopt the anti-Islamic ideology of the US conservative right.
The question to be raised here is: how was Tony Blair able to drag his country into three wars in three Islamic countries, namely Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq, if he didn't know Islam well? And more importantly, how could a man who doesn't understand Islam have led Britain? In light of Mr Blair's own statements, it seems unrealistic that he should serve in the Quartet that is working towards an equitable and comprehensive settlement for the Middle East crisis.
When Yukiya Amano, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), went on a recent mission to Israel, he didn't leave the country any the wiser, since Israel, under the wing of Washington, is still allowed to maintain its so-called "nuclear ambiguity", the Emirati newspaper Al Khaleej stated in its editorial. "The Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu can accordingly say 'no' to any international action that seeks to tackle this question, even if that action is prompted by the IAEA's director general in person."
A report recently issued by the IAEA said the international body has called on Israel to consider joining the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and allow its nuclear facilities to be subjected to all IAEA regulations. Mr Amano also relayed the UN General Assembly's concerns regarding Israel's nuclear capabilities. "Yet, what Mr Amano asked for, Israel has declined. What next? Should the IAEA yield to Israel's bullying on such a serious matter? Or should it press ahead with its mission, as per its legal, human and moral duty?"
It is the IAEA's job to present the nuclear case of Israel before the Security Council and compel it to make Israel join the NPT and open its nuclear facilities for inspection, as is the usual practice with other countries. * Digest compiled by Racha Makarem rmakarem@thenational.ae
