scholarly journals Middle Eastern Muslim Women Speak

1985 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 317-319
Author(s):  
Feroza Allee

In Middle Eastern Muslim Women Speak, editors Fernea and Bezirgan havemade a valiant effort to unveil an important dimension of Middle Eastern historyand society, a dimension that has been for the most part, hidden from viewbecause of the false notion that the world of Islam is a world created by menfor men rather than a joint creation of men and women.The book is a collection of documents from different historical periods andregions of the Middle East, as well as from different social and economicgroups. it provides a somewhat clearer view of the conditions, aspirations,struggles, and achievements of Middle Eastern Muslim women.In some ways the book is a paradox. The editors show how Middle Easternwomen haved risen to greater political and public eminence than women inthe United States, while as a sex remaining largely subservient to men andenjoying less access to the means of personal advancement.The first book to use a documentary approach rather than essays by thirdpersons, it is also the first book to include material unavailable in English.Many of the selections of these autobiographical and biographical writingshave been translated by the editors from Arabic, Persian, or French. And,it is the first to gather together materials from A.D. 622 (beginning of Islam)to the present. Offering a fresh and lively approach the book should be ofvalue not only to those interested in the Middle East, but also to anthropologistsand social historians.From a vast area, the editors have chosen a sample of women from twelvecountries. Despite their different backgrounds and experiences, the womenrepresented have all worked out their own solutions within the context of localpractice established between the two contradictory poles of Koranic injunctionand family and tribal custom.The book has a well-presented Foreword, a detailed Introduction, and is ...

Author(s):  
Michael C. Hudson

This chapter examines the roots of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. It begins with an overview of the origins and development of the United States’s involvement in the region over the past century, focusing on the traditional American interests. It then considers the structure of Middle Eastern policymaking and its domestic political context, as well as Washington’s response to new regional tensions and upheavals since the late 1970s. It also discusses new developments in the region, including the rise of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Al-Qaeda and the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the U.S.-led interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the Palestinian–Israeli impasse. The evolution of U.S. policy since 2000 in the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama is explored as well. The chapter concludes with an analysis of an ‘Obama doctrine’ and ‘American decline’ in the Middle East and the world.


2004 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Mart

AbstractIn the 1950s, the United States experienced a domestic religious revival that offered postwar Americans a framework to interpret the world and its unsettling international political problems. Moreover, the religious message of the cold war that saw the God-fearing West against atheistic communists encouraged an unprecedented ecumenism in American history. Jews, formerly objects of indifference if not disdain and hatred in the United States, were swept up in the ecumenical tide of “Judeo-Christian” values and identity and, essentially, “Christianized” in popular and political culture. Not surprisingly, these cultural trends affected images of the recently formed State of Israel. In the popular and political imagination, Israel was formed by the “Chosen People” and populated by prophets, warriors, and simple folk like those in Bible stories. The popular celebration of Israel also romanticized its people at the expense of their Arab (mainly Muslim) neighbors. Battling foes outside of the Judeo-Christian family, Israelis seemed just like Americans. Americans treated the political problems of the Middle East differently than those in other parts of the world because of the religious significance of the “Holy Land.” A man such as Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, who combined views of hard-nosed “realpolitik” with religious piety, acknowledged the special status of the Middle East by virtue of the religions based there. Judaism, part of the “Judeo-Christian civilization,” benefitted from this religious consciousness, while Islam remained a religion and a culture apart. This article examines how the American image of Jews, Israelis, and Middle Eastern politics was re-framed in the early 1950s to reflect popular ideas of religious identity. These images were found in fiction, the press, and the speeches and writings of social critics and policymakers. The article explores the role of the 1950s religious revival in the identification of Americans with Jews and Israelis and discusses the rise of the popular understanding that “Judeo-Christian” values shaped American culture and politics.


2005 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 21-28
Author(s):  
Graham E. Fuller

The DebateQuestion 1: Various commentators have frequently invoked the importance of moderate Muslims and the role that they can play in fighting extremism in the Muslim world. But it is not clear who is a moderate Muslim. The recent cancellation of Tariq Ramadan’s visa to the United States, the raids on several American Muslim organizations, and the near marginalization of mainstream American Muslims in North America pose the following question: If moderate Muslims are critical to an American victory in the war on terror, then why does the American government frequently take steps that undermine moderate Muslims? Perhaps there is a lack of clarity about who the moderate Muslims are. In your view, who are these moderate Muslims and what are their beliefs and politics? GEF: Who is a moderate Muslim? That depends on whom you ask and what that person’s (or government’s) agenda is. Moderate is also a quite relative term, understood differently by different people. For our purposes here, let’s examine two basically different approaches to this question: an American view and a Middle Eastern view of what characterizes a moderate Muslim. Most non-Muslims would probably define a moderate Muslim as anyone who believes in democracy, tolerance, a non-violent approach to politics, and equitable treatment of women at the legal and social levels. Today, the American government functionally adds several more criteria: Amoderate Muslim is one who does not oppose the country’s strategic and geopolitical ambitions in the world, who accepts American interests and preferences within the world order, who believes that Islam has no role in politics, and who avoids any confrontation – even political – with Israel. There are deep internal contradictions and warring priorities within the American approach to the Muslim world. While democratization and “freedom” is the Bush administration’s self-proclaimed global ideological goal, the reality is that American demands for security and the war against terror take priority over the democratization agenda every time. Democratization becomes a punishment visited upon American enemies rather than a gift bestowed upon friends. Friendly tyrants take priority over those less cooperative moderate and democratic Muslims who do not acquiesce to the American agenda in the Muslim world. Within the United States itself, the immense domestic power of hardline pro-Likud lobbies and the Israel-firsters set the agenda on virtually all discourse concerning the Muslim world and Israel. This group has generally succeeded in excluding from the public dialogue most Muslim (or even non-Muslim) voices that are at all critical of Israel’s policies. This de facto litmus test raises dramatically the threshold for those who might represent an acceptable moderate Muslim interlocutor. The reality is that there is hardly a single prominent figure in the Muslim world who has not at some point voiced anger at Israeli policies against the Palestinians and who has not expressed ambivalence toward armed resistance against the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands. Thus, few Muslim leaders enjoying public legitimacy in the Muslim world can meet this criterion these days in order to gain entry to the United States to participate in policy discussions. In short, moderate Muslimis subject to an unrealistic litmus test regarding views on Israel that functionally excludes the great majority of serious voices representative of genuine Muslim thinkers in the Middle East who are potential interlocutors. There is no reason to believe that this political framework will change in the United States anytime soon. In my view, a moderate Muslim is one who is open to the idea of evolutionary change through history in the understanding and practice of Islam, one who shuns literalism and selectivism in the understanding of sacred texts. Amoderate would reject the idea that any one group or individual has a monopoly on defining Islam and would seek to emphasize common ground with other faiths, rather than accentuate the differences. Amoderate would try to seek within Islam the roots of those political and social values that are broadly consonant with most of the general values of the rest of the contemporary world. A moderate Muslim would not reject the validity of other faiths. Against the realities of the contemporary Middle East, a moderate Muslim would broadly eschew violence as a means of settling political issues, but still might not condemn all aspects of political violence against state authorities who occupy Muslim lands by force – such as Russia in Chechnya, the Israeli state in the Palestine, or even American occupation forces in Iraq. Yet even here, in principle, a moderate must reject attacks against civilians, women, and children in any struggle for national liberation. Moderates would be open to cooperation with the West and the United States, but not at the expense of their own independence and sovereignty. 


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. p65
Author(s):  
Sri Michael Das

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, situated not only physically at the center of the world has also been the center of some of its most significant moments. These involved the Kingdom’s role in supporting peace between Israel and Egypt alongside former President and Humanitarian Jimmy Carter. Carter, demonized for his Southern style and failures in the Middle East, especially during the Iran Hostage Crisis, engineered one of its greatest diplomatic feats ever: Peace between ancient enemies, Israel and Egypt. Their long-standing vendetta which had real consequences for centuries nearly moved the modern world to the brink of World War 3. In stepped President Carter, Anwar Sadat, Menachem Begin and eventually, the Royal Family of Jordan and all that changed. In this paper I would like to explore the personalities, roles and conditions that brought them together, re-celebrate their achievements, and challenge the world to model their characters and repeat their successes. Once again or even still, Israel is the pearl in the Middle Eastern oyster, and a weary world is eager move on. It is my hope my research will give us an inkling where to begin a process that could once again prevent a Global Conflict.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Israa Daas ◽  

Abstract The Palestine-Israel conflict is probably one of the most pressing problems in the Middle East. Moreover, the United States has been involved in this conflict since the 1970s. Therefore, the present research aims to learn more about the American perception of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It was conducted using a survey that addressed Americans from different backgrounds, focusing on four variables: the American government’s position, solutions, the Israeli settlements, and Jerusalem. The research suggests a correlation between political party and the American perception of the conflict. It appears that Republicans seem to be against the withdrawal of the Israeli settlements, and they believe that the US government is not biased toward Israel. Nevertheless, Democrats tend to believe that the US government is biased in favor of Israel, and they support withdrawing the Israeli settlements. Moreover, there might be another correlation between the American perception and the source of information they use to learn about the conflict. Most of the surveyed Americans, whatever their resource of information that they use to learn about the conflict is, tend to believe that the US is biased in favor of Israel. It is crucial to know about the American perception when approaching to a solution to the conflict as the US is a mediator in this conflict, and a powerful country in the world. Especially because it has a permanent membership in the UN council. KEYWORDS: American Perception, Palestine-Israel Conflict, Jerusalem, Israeli settlements


2021 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-24
Author(s):  
Deanna Ferree Womack

This article considers the history and contemporary reality of Middle Eastern Christianity in light of new demographic information available from the World Christian Encyclopedia. For readers interested in church history and World Christianity, it identifies key lessons to be learned about Christians in and from the Middle East today. It focuses on understanding the region’s Christian diversity, the complexities of recent demographic decline, the relationship between Middle Eastern and global Christianity, and the interreligious realities of Christian life in the region.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoran Jovanovski ◽  
Andrej Iliev ◽  
Anita Ilieva Nikolovska

Historical development of cyber warfare follows three major historical periods: first period follows the technological advances of information technology during the 1980s until the end of the Cold War in 1990, second period is from the end of the Cold War to the terrorist attacks in United States during 11-th september 2001 year and the third period  is from the terrorist attacks in United States during 11-th september 2001 year onwards. Each of the mentioned historical periods follows a specific doctrine and strategy of dealing with the national security threats from cyberspace. The world super powers and the world states, introduce appropriate strategies and national policies to deal with the consequences of this kind of warfare. Expression of cyberspace is linked to a short story titled "Burning Chrome" in the 1982 year written by American author William Gibson. In the following years, this word turned out to be conspicuously related to online PC systems. According to NATO, people are part of cyberspace.  According to this, NATO defines that cyberspace is more than just internet, including not only hardware, software and information systems, but also peoples and social interaction with these networks. The first cyber warfare weapon ever known in history was Stuxnet. Stuxnet's objective was to physically annihilate a military target. Stuxnet has contaminated more than 60,000 PCs around the world, mostly in Iran. While international cooperation is essential, each nation should in near future develop a National foundation, its own national cyber security strategy, authorities and capabilities. Every nation state, should  require effective coordination and cooperation among governmental entities at the national and sub-national levels as well as the private sector and civil society. The main hypothesis of this paper is to present the historical development and perspectives of cyber warfare and accordingly propose the best legal concepts, national doctrines and strategies for dealing with this modern type of warfare.


2010 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 391-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin W. Martin

International fairs—the “folk-festivals of capitalism”—have long been a favorite topic of historians studying quintessential phenomena of modernity such as the celebration of industrial productivity, the construction of national identities, and the valorization of bourgeois leisure and consumption in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in Europe, the United States, and Latin America. To date, however, such spectacles occurring in the modern Middle East remain largely unexamined. This article, an analysis of the discourse surrounding the first Damascus International Exposition in 1954, is conceived in part as a preliminary effort to redress this historiographic imbalance.


2003 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 325-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mustafa Ozbilgin ◽  
Geraldine Healy

Mainstream work on careers tends to be situated within an individualistic paradigm and against a North American/Western European context (although frequently unacknowledged). This paper throws new conceptual and contextual insights on the career concept through its exploration of careers in the Middle East. It draws on articles included in two special issues on career development in the Middle East published in Career Development International, and demonstrates how careers are intertwined with history, politics, organisational practices and structures as well as the individual self. Importantly it identifies the interconnectedness of the Middle East with the rest of the world and how this impacts on individual careers. Through this regional lens, the complexity and diversity of the career concept is brought into sharp focus.


Author(s):  
Tamir Sorek ◽  
Danyel Reiche

Sports in the Middle East have become a major issue in global affairs: Qatar’s successful bid for the FIFA World Cup 2022 (won in a final vote against the United States), the 2005 UEFA Champions League Final in Turkey’s most populous city Istanbul, the European basketball championship EuroBasket in 2017 in Israel, and other major sporting events, such as the annually staged Formula 1 races in Bahrain and Abu Dhabi, have put an international spotlight on the region. In particular, media around the world are discussing the question of whether the most prestigious sporting events should be staged in a predominantly authoritarian, socially conservative, and politically contentious part of the world....


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document