About Me
I should start this blog by saying something about myself.
Here goes…
Palestinians move. We move with the wind, we move the wars, and we move the flow of the ages - all in the name of circumstance and preservation. My father moved from Palestine to Jordan, Jordan to Egypt, where he met my mother in medical school, and recently chose to return to Jerusalem, to be closer to his birth place. Since that date, my parents have kept me in motion, in regular turns across the Atlantic, taught me to appreciate my culture and heritage while simultaneously encouraging me to discover my niche in the world. Born and raised in Egypt the majority of my life, I lived amongst poverty and destitution, with unfortunate young men and women striving to travel, to immigrate or live abroad. America to them is opportunity, salvation and the promise of a new beginning. I consider myself lucky to have had the fortuity to pursue my dreams of coming to America, of obtaining a matchless liberal arts education and above all, retaining yet refining my notions of origin and identity.
The world today is starkly different. Since my departure to the United States, it has proven impossible to find my own unique niche in fact such an endeavor has been rendered unnecessary. Instead, I have become a 'global citizen,' and my role precipitously manifested on September 11th 2001.
My education at the University of Chicago has provided me with a unique window to the world and has naturalized my global citizenship. I graduated with an honors degree in Political Science and Economics and have been living in Chicago for over four years now. I started working fulltime last summer doing economic consulting for a prominent US corporate. My background and work experience has centered on the financial services sector doing work in Egypt, the UK and the US – these experiences ranged from investor relations and research to investment banking and consulting.
So why am I writing a blog? More importantly, why should you read my blog?
The latter first…After realizing my extreme zeal for politics, I felt I needed to fully satiate my interest. I want to bring my candid thoughts to the open and I would like to document those endless dinner table discussions in an approachable manner for the reader. Thus, the style of this blog will take a pseudo-academic approach with postings written in a ‘political-journal’ fashion maintaining satire, mockery, support, optimism and enthusiasm and whatever else needed to send messages, thoughts and opinions across.
So, what’s in it for you, the reader? I will provide a one-of a kind perspective on global affairs affecting the Middle East focusing on Egypt and Palestine given my roots. The theme of the blog will be that of ‘observation’ (hence the title page).
My politics are simple. I give thanks to my grandfather, a prominent member of parliament in Egypt for transcending down his strong nationalistic sentiment to me. Thus, nationalism runs in my blood.
My other grandfather, kicked out from his home in 1948 moved to Amman, Jordan where he established a tea manufacturing company. He is uncompromising with regards to the state of Israel and based on his personal experiences, that is certainly a rational perspective.
My father, a liberal and who is currently working in Jerusalem is more compromising. He would tell me stories of his Israeli friends and his discussions of co-existence with them. At this point, it is very well the only viable solution - an approach I advocate since it is by far, more pragmatic.
I am a huge supporter of the Palestinian cause and as a global citizen I took the responsibility of advocating peace, co-existence and understanding between opinions in conflict when I was at Chicago. I participated in dialogues regarding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and fervently sought to understand what issues engulfed the contemporary generation of Palestinians, Muslims, Israelis and Jews on campus. It was an effective method of bringing the realities of the outside world to the context of a classroom. Since I’ve temporarily left the world of academia and the classroom (I will go back for a higher degree for sure), writing this blog would act as a conduit for maintaining these dialogues.
So far, I’ve enjoyed the civil liberties and freedom the US has offered me. However, I am not a supporter of the current Bush administration and their foreign politics. US domestic politics have not been a drastic concern to me and I won’t waste space on this blog to discuss the ethics behind same-sex marriages or whether I think Bernanke should maintain an interest rate hike. I am against the war in Iraq and the general meddling of US affairs in the Middle East – a topic I will focus on heavily.
On the other hand, I am disgraced at inter-Arab relations. Yes, I am not supporting the US’ foreign policy towards the region however this does not imply that Arab leaders are doing a great job of running their countries or maintaining transparent and civil relations with one another.
Juxtaposing both my repulsion at current US foreign policy as well as my disgrace at the Arabs’ image and their perception globally, I am laying a middle ground for a semi-objective forum for discussion – i.e. for issues/topics that are worthy of debate. Nonetheless, my opinions will be addressed explicitly and my emotions felt.
I hope this blog becomes a conduit for discussion, exchange of opinions and a learning ground for all readers. Enjoy!
posted by The Egyptian Observer at 3:58 PM
3 Comments:
Great and well written introduction!
Steering the middle path is the only way to go.
It really disturbs me when I see Hezbollah hosting conferences entitled, "Abu Ghraib: Learn about American Democracy." It's disgusting to see what happened at Abu Ghraib, but it is even more revolting to see a Shia fundamentalist party that mutilates Israeli soldiers claim that torture has anything to do with democracy. The democratic aspect of the affair is that those pictures were published and that the US government was forced to act. Did anything similar happen when Assad crushed Hama or Malik Hussein crushed Arafat in 1971? And who is to argue that the US military represents all of American democracy?
There is much to love about American governance. It's one of the best places in the world to open a business and it has a constitution that provides immeasurable protections to its citizens.
If we are to have a true discussion, we must not look at the "he said, she said" aspects that create diametric opposition. As you say, we must look at the US and Arab regimes for what they are. It is not worthwhile to begin uselessly comparing US actions at Abu Ghraib to Arab complicity in the genocide in Darfur.
Constructive discussion comes in critiquing an act for what it is and applying the same rubric to each situation, regardless of the location (ie, the US or Syria).
@Lebanon.profile. I agree with you when you have to look at the regimes for what they are. Also I believe it is very important to be self critical. If you continuously are bashed by people of other nationalities, you feel the need to defend yourself. And then - due to a lack of self criticism - violations of human rights take place and/or continue to take place.
@suzanne, @Lebanon.profile. I echo both comments made. It is futile to look at the 'he said, she said' rebuttal but dig deeper and analyze regimes, regions, cultures and countries in isolation and for what they are.
In essence, it is imperative to apply the same rubric as aforementioned to all situation/issues. The trouble comes when double standards to situations are applied and sadly both the Arab and Western worlds have been culprits. It is also difficult to legitimately decipher any clandestine self-interests behind certain events/actions or incidences.
For example, one can say that the US entered Iraq because of oil and ONLY because of oil and used the excuse of Saddam's tyranny to legitimize its actions. This seems to be a strong and believable assertion but unfortunately it is difficult to confirm.
Another example is Iran's nuclear program which has had the EU and US going haywire. French Foreign Minister Phillipe Douste-Blazy directly attacked Iran recently asserting that the program is 'military.' Is this deja-vu? Does this seem to be the excuse for a legitimate invasion or intervention in Iranian affairs? Again based on speculation and unconfirmed evidence.
Yet, the same rubic should be applied to both situations for a viable candid assessment.
Post a Comment
<< Home