News

Ostaad, I wil read the article in a bit thx but one question

I already have for you is I am stunned you mentioned Israel aong w/Iran, Syria, Turkey, Iraq..and I wonder why. Beyond the IFs could you please elaborate. I read that Netanyahu is helbent on pursuing exactly the same poicies you mentioned, which somes as no surprise...thx again, r.

I don't know and it puzzles me Farokh but I thought yes and no,

I just read a policeman in Iraq (forget where) killed four US military and that this happened several times before so they are not happy campers over there for sure, these are extreme acts. At the same time Obama DOES have to pull out to pull INTO Afghanistan and it seems the process is underway. So I thought maybe the election represented a kind of ebullience, a hopefulness about the future, O don't know but there is an inherent paradox in the Iraqi situation because IF, overtime they do pull through and establish some kind of stable democracy there, it would prove that a-hole Bush somehow right in the overarching view, and that would be...terrible..for me..to admit, but you can't hope otherwise can you?

Thank you Asghar,

Yes it is true, the historical political and cultural overlap of Iran and Iraq is hard for Westerners to follow and might also be so for Middle Easterners who have an agenda and do not want to admit the richness and intricacy of the the history. I never heard about the expulsion of the one millon Iraqis by Hussein (presumably Shia ones w/the Persian last names, etc...). It is a fascinating counterbalance to the Shah's "Persianization campaign", isn't it?

It is also interesting that you note the anti-Persian undercurrent, which is very real, and one of the things I didn't understand is why the current rift in the Islamic world is being termed one between Shia and Sunni, which is really stretching a point, since Syria is not Shia and and the Shia are only one component of Lebanon, pus they are the poorest, and obviously Gaza isn't Shia and so forth. I believe IRI gave up its Shia caliphate-like dreams long ago and the rift is more about US satellites (or corporate oil venture partners) and those who challenge them, w/Iran spearheading the challenge. Constantly referring to it in the Western & co. media as a "Persian" or "Shia" issue vs. Arab or Sunni degrades the central issues which are political and economic into an ethnic one. I don't see it. By placing the blame on this supposed ethnic issue on Iran they are demonizing IRI further. Maybe it is part of their own "paranoc" and part propaganda. Of course I am new to this detailed scrutiny of the region but that is my impression now.

So, exacty, your conclusion at the end of your post is consistent with Ostaad's, it's about hegemony. And w/in this pro/anti-US imperialsim divide, Iraq is a major major piece of the pie due to its location, size, cultural split, and possibility now of having some kind of fledgling democracy. Egypt hosts the internal conference on Paestine tomorrow, I read Assad is willing to participate in the issue along w/Obama at this point and also Fatah has released many prisonrrs to Gaza so it should be interesting (for me at least) to see what happens. Maybe you can pretty much predict it but I am in no position to do so.

Thank you very much for the input.

rosie, Egypt is losing ground, and they are worried.

There's more going on in the region which irks the Egyptians. The center of gravity of the "new Middle East" has shifted. The countries which constitute this new and improved ME are Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Syria and probably Israel if, a big if, it abandons its policies of occupation, illegal settlement building and Apartheid. Egype's regime is stale, despotic and poor. The S. Arabian regime is rich but divided, backward and week. The countries which I listed have the capabilities and the potential to ensure stability and economic growth for large populations. Iraq has an abundance of water and oil, Iran with oil and gas, and Turkey has a forward looking democratic government, lots of water and a central geopolitical location. All of these countries have large markets with young populations. The Egypt despite of its large population has no ideological leadership and meager energy resources. S. Arbaia has abundant energy resources but is completely at the mercy of the US, plus its miniscule population does not present an attractive market. 

The reason why I brought up jealousy was the fact that Egypt is witnessing the shift in the center of gravity and is powerless to anything about it.

The following article will shed some light on what's going on and it will provide some explanation why Egypt is worried.

U.S. report: Saudis replacing Egypt as regional leader

//www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1066555.html

Of course in my view S. Arabia is nowhere ready for the task, because the big boys in the ME that I listed don't need anything the Saudis have to offer.

Election and Democracy, REALLY!?

So now the Iraqi people are having a free Election and Democratic Government?, really, since when?

How could anybody be under total control of invading and occupying forces and have "Free Elections and Democtratic Government"?

Did we forget that it is US Government that is running that Country, with 150,000 armed troops and 15 Permanent Bases, whose mission is to force the people of Iraq into submission and acceptance of the Colonial Master, at any cost?

Did we forget that they have already murdered more than a Million innocent people to achieve this goal?

Or did the US Government become totally compassionate and humane since Criminal Bush left his Station?

Stop the presses people. First you have to have an independent Nation and then start the conversation about the influences that might corrupt it.

"Paranoid" Al-Ahram

This topic has many aspects. There are many undercurrents here.  People who are not aware of history often mistake any occurance of Iranian culture in Iraq as Iran's attempt to dominate the country. They may not be aware for instance that the word "Eragh" (Iraq) meaning lowlands, is a Persian word, so is Baghdad, meaning a gift from god.  The Mesopotamian was part of the ancient Persian empires.  In fact it was Saddam Hussein who tried to de-Persianize Iraq by expelling over one million Iraqies in the early 70's.  Of course both Iranian nationalism and Arab nationalism have demonized each other at times.  Nasser was the one who started calling the Persian Gulf the Arabian Gulf.  You can sense this anti-Persian undercurrent in this article too, with its references to the "Persian nation" not a Muslem nation.  The writer is not mentioning Iraq's invasion of Iran and the tacit support of countries like Egypt for that invasion.  Of course there is little doubt that Iran wants in in what happens in Iraq. It has vital interests there.  The Shia in Iraq do look to Iran but just as was the case between say China and Vietnam this relationship is problematic.  Also, Iran's internal dynamics is reflected in what happens in Iraq, e.g. the Ahamdinejad clique vs Rafsanjani having different approaches and objectives.  That being said, Egypt's anymosity, and this writer's, is more about who has the hegemony in the Arab world in terms of politcal and cultural leadeship. The Egyptians feel that's their turf and Iran is infringing on it. 

Oh I was aware that al-Ahram was giving its own

very specific spin. I wasn't thinking so much about jealousy as about the split within the Middle East between the US "satellites" and the countries more in step with Iran. Obviously now that the US will be removing its forces and Iraq actually has something that could be the seeds of a fledgling stable democracy, and the location and size, it is CRUCIAL which way Iraq goes. (And why should it go the way of the US after the way it was devastated and when it has so many historical and cultural ties to Iran?..but isn't there a paradox here, that in the aftermath of it all they DID have this election?..) But still there are interesting details here. When you look at the government taking away the bilingual Persian signs at Karbala, something is strange..I do think they want to show they are "the little engine that could" and perhaps have the first secular democracy in the region, and that they would be wary of ANY strong power's potential to influence them politically. Which Iran has.The economic deals and more are great. But I still think there is more than one grain of truth in the article.Or no?

Maybe I should change the title to Egypt SAYS Iran woos, Iraq worries OR Iran woos Iraq, Egypt worries. But that would unfeature the article... ;o)

This is a bad case of sour grapes and jealousy.

Al Ahram, as the mouthpiece of the regime in Egypt, is reflecting that regime's frustration because they don't count any more. Al Ahram and the regime don't care about what the Iraqis think. This article is not about Iraq, it is simply about Egyptian's regime's loss of influence in the region.