Opinion-editorials decyphered [Voltaire Network]

Voltaire Network

Voltaire Network

Opinion-editorials decyphered

Every day, the International Op-Ed section presents an overview and analysis of the positions of the major international decision makers and manipulators.

“Sudan follows the steps of Iraq”

by Moukhtar al Dobabi

10 March 2006
The call issued by the Secretary General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, to replace African forces with international troops is not a personal initiative. In effect, it is a US-European project and that explains the justifiable rejection it has found in Sudan. The deployment of international troops will lead to the failure of the African Union to solve the Darfur crisis. It is another way to say that the African and Arab solution is not enough and that implies the intervention of the big (...)

“War is not the solution to the crisis in Darfur”

by Aissam Eddine Al Hajj

10 March 2006
Sudan’s Liberation Army movement expresses is views on the role being played by the British government to solve the crisis in our country. The movement thanks the British Minister of Foreign Affairs for his presence at negotiations; the movement is even more thankful for the fact that he is the first European foreign minister to have taken that step. The movement also thanks his statement confirming the strong willingness of the United Kingdom and its commitment to develop peace and (...)

“ Darfur: Stop the killing, or pay the price”

by Jack Straw

10 March 2006
The Darfur crisis has already claimed between 70,000 and 400,000 lives. It can only be solved through a political accord that targets the cause of the conflict and that is supposed to be the objective of those gathered in Abuja, Nigeria. The United Kingdom supports the peace process and it has financed the ongoing meeting with one million pounds, but the advancement of negotiations is quite slow, while negotiating parties do not respect the deadline set for December 31, 2005 as the moment (...)

“ Our friend, an architect of the genocide in Darfur”

by Don Cheadle, John Prendergast

10 March 2006
Eighteen months ago, the United States made the conclusion that genocide was taking place in Darfur. However, George W. Bush, the only president to have said that genocide was occurring there has taken little action in order to stop it. The reason for that lack of action could well be Salah Abdallah Gosh, a name well known by those responsible for anti-terrorist war and the victims of atrocities in Darfur. _Between 1990 and 1996, Gosh was assistant to Bin Laden in Sudan and after 2003, he (...)

“Ending genocide in Darfur”

by David Tuller, John Heffernan

10 March 2006
In September 2004, the Bush administration said that murder, rape and violence in Darfur constituted genocide. Since that moment on, hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, but the responsible ones for such a massacre (the Sudanese government and the militias) continue to wage their campaign against the non-Arab population. That campaign began in 2003. Belligerents present or identify their adversaries as “Arabs” or “Africans”, though the distinction is not based in skin color but on (...)

“U.S. must act now to end genocide in Sudan”

by Joseph R. Biden Jr.

10 March 2006
In Darfur, we are witnessing a methodical kind of genocide which has claimed between 180,000 and 400,000 Sudanese lives and the displacement of 2 million people since the early 2004. That is the result of systematic elimination campaign launched by the Sudanese regime, whose target are the non-Arab and African tribal groups. At present, genocide continues to increase and the situation has worsen in such a manner that the UN and humanitarian agencies can no longer reach certain areas. (...)

Darfur: Simplification and Moralization of the Conflict

by Voltaire Network

Paris (France) | 10 March 2006
The extremely complex situation in Darfur is being ignored by analysts and by the commentaries published in the western mainstream media, particularly in the United States. US media analysts deal with the Darfur issue only as an ethnic conflict, or more precisely as the “genocide” of “Africans” at the hands of the “Arabs”. If it is a fact that the conflict leads to massacres that cruelly affect sedentary populations, it is false to suggest that confrontation is based on such ethnic or “racial” reasons and that such a division is the cause of the conflict.

“The new anti-Semitism, cartoon division”

by Bradley Burston

2 March 2006
If there is something that journalists know what to do is insulting people. The good journalists know how to avoid that, including using racist terms, personal attacks and denigration of individuals. The bad journalists usually do not care about insulting people, thus contravening the professional ethics. The worse journalists, a group in which sometimes experts of this profession are found, hurt people voluntarily. And of these people, no one can offend so many people at once as a (...)

“Don’t be Fooled. This isn’t an Issue of Islam versus Secularism”

by Robert Fisk

2 March 2006
The story about the cartoons has nothing to do with what has been called the issue of Islam versus secularism. The fact is that Muslims live with their religion in their daily lives, culture, but not us. They have preserved their faith beyond countless historical vicissitudes. We, on the contrary, have abandoned our faith. Therefore, this conflict implies the “West against Islam” and not the “Christians against Islam” – because there are not many Christians in Europe. And we cannot come out of (...)

“The freedom that hurts us”

by Sarah Joseph

2 March 2006
The battle has already come up: the religious extremism vs. freedom of speech. Reportedly, this is the bundler caused by the world tensions resulting from the publication of cartoons featuring Mohammed in Denmark and in other parts of Europe.
However, apart from the media, I have been receiving in my mailbox a number of messages about this matter since two weeks ago and the tone is very different. Everybody has a passionate vision about this issue, and not only because it is related to (...)

“Freedom of expression or freedom to offend”

by Abdel Bari Atouan

2 March 2006
We would have preferred demonstrations in the Arab-Muslim world to be limited to a pacific expression and not to be aggressive acts like the attacks against Danish embassies and consulates. It’s true these are regrettable and unjustified acts, but we understand the irritation of the 1.5 billion Muslims after the publication of the caricatures of Prophet Mohammed. These are irresponsible drawings which reflect a racist view that encourages hate against Islam.
To boycott the products of the (...)

“To Muslims of the world”

by Carsten Juste

2 March 2006
Muslim Citizens:
Allow me to say that our newspaper, Jyllands Posten, believes in the freedom of religion and respects all individuals. We apologize for the great misunderstanding caused by the publication of the caricatures which presented Prophet Mohammed and fed feelings and fuelled militaristic feelings with regard to Denmark and provoked the calls to boycott the Danish products. I’d also like to dispel some misunderstandings. On September 30, 2005, our journal published the (...)

“Free speech and civil responsibility”

by Tariq Ramadan

2 March 2006
There are three aspects to be taken into account while analyzing and assessing the caricatures of Prophet Mohammed. The first is that painting any prophet is forbidden in the Muslim religion. The second is that, in the Muslim world, it’s not common to make fun of our religion or others. Thus, these caricatures are considered, even by the “moderate” Muslims, an attack against a sacred person and as a provocation against our religion. The third aspect is that Muslims must understand that making (...)

“A call for respect and calm”

by José Luis R. Zapatero, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan

2 March 2006
With increasing worry, we witness the tensions provoked by the publication of caricatures of Prophet Mohammed in the European journals which have been considered offensive by the Muslisms. We make a call for respect and calm and we ask the voice of reason to be heard. Last year Turkey and Spain began a common work about an “alliance of civilizations” aimed at putting an end to the spiral of hate. The current events confirm the legitimacy of our diagnosis and the urgency to act.
In a (...)

“Short glossary of a caricaturist week”

by Philippe Val

2 March 2006
Prophet Mohammed: religious and military leader born about 570 in Mecca followed by a long period of successful victories that went from Spain to the whole Middle East. A historical figure that belongs to mankind. Therefore, in those countries where freedom of expression has been achieved, he can be represented as people want even when the Sunni can not represent his image.
The right to representation: To represent a thing or a person is a founding element of language. To question the (...)

“Islam: not to give in to the pacifying policy”

by Max Gallo

2 March 2006
Would we have tomorrow the courage –and the possibility- of saying what we think about Islam, whether it’s true or not, or should we practice self-censorship? Freedom or self-censorship are the challenge of the moment and the pressure is so strong that we forget that violence takes place in countries where demonstrations are made with the consent of the power. In those places, no other religion apart from Islam is tolerated and they are so chased and stigmatized that they are forbidden, (...)

“Democracy in a cartoon”

by Ibn Warraq

2 March 2006
The Danish caricatures bring the most important problem of our times up: the freedom of expression. Are we Westerners going to give in to the pressures of a medieval society or are we going to defend our most valuable worth: freedom, the freedom of expression, an achievement for which millions of people have died for?
There’s no democracy without freedom: freedom of debate, of disagreement or insulting and offending, even. This is a freedom the Islamic world does not have and without it, (...)

Caricatures and hysteria that disguise the truth

by Voltaire Network

Paris (France) | 2 March 2006
Had we wanted to be exhaustive, we could have published hundreds of articles, interviews and editorials about the caricatures of Mohammed and the reactions in the Muslim world. This story has reached incredible proportions in the international media. Most editorialists have commented the incident; the mainstream media have published long articles and even special dossiers. In most of the cases, the conflict presented by the western media is the same: they portray a conflict between a West that embodies freedom and a Muslim world, frequently identified with the Persian-Arab world, that embodies obscurantism. It is an approach that disguises the true questions of the issue.

“Bonfire of Pieties”

by Amir Taheri

1 March 2006
The media made news with the headlines about the rallies caused by the publication of cartoons featuring the prophet Mohammed. But, do these rallies represent the Muslim world?
The “machinery of anger” was started by the Muslim Brothers who urged their followers to go out to the street. Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, one of the leaders of Muslim Brothers made a fatwa in an Al Jazeera program. Quickly, the rival organizations of Muslim Brothers, like Hizb ut-Tahrir, followed the same path not to be left (...)

“Lighten up, fellow Muslims”

by Irshad Manji

1 March 2006
In the world economic forum held in January, I noticed something revealing. In a session about the US religious right-wing, a cartoonist showed a cartoon featuring Pat Robertson and everybody in the hall laughed. Among those who laughed, there was a figure from the British Muslim community who immediately stopped laughing when a cartoon of a Muslim religious man was shown. Since this happened, there has been a ferocious fight between the European Union and the Muslim world as a result of (...)

"London’s Conference is the framework to help Afghanistan"

by George Soros

15 February 2006
Afghanistan’s situation is masked by the incessant violence in Iraq. However, the Parliament is packed with warlords, the drug trade is thriving, and violence is on the rise. During this week, world leaders will have the opportunity in London to steer developments. This agreement will be based on Bonn’s Conference 2001.
It is necessary a renewed attention to Afghanistan, for the country is in ruins and the world is suffering. Drug trade is a good example, since Afghanistan has become the (...)

Afghanistan: Media Unanimity

by Voltaire Network

Paris (France) | 15 February 2006
The London Conference on Afghanistan was held amidst the relative indifference of the press, since dailies devoted little space to the event. However, we witnessed a media campaign by atlantist circles on «opinion» pages both before and during the conference. The objective of these forums, particularly of a single colour, was to mobilize public opinion in favour of support of the Hamid Karzai government as well as to recall the atlantist version on Afghanistan.

"NATO’s role in Afghanistan"

by Jaap de Hoop Scheffer

15 February 2006
About five years ago, Afghanistan was the launching base of the world’s worst terrorist attack when it was one of the oppressed countries of the world. Today, the Afghan population has elected its first pluralist parliament which, for several years, has counted on an incredible amount of women. This progress has been achieved thanks to the considerable assistance coming from abroad. They still have a long way to go and the international community must provide the proper aid for the turning (...)

"Alarm in Afghanistan"

by Nasrine Gross

15 February 2006
For Afghans, the United States is a determining element in its reconstruction. Washington has released them from crime, poverty and from being a shelter for terrorists. But, Afghans are worried about the reduction of troops and the economic assistances. Afghans see their country as a patient who has just had several transplants and, therefore, must be in a recovery room, not in the streets.
The reduction of American troops could inspire the Talibans and Al Qaeda. Unfortunately, if (...)

"Don’t short-change Afghanistan again"

by Frederick Starr, Karl F. Inderfurth, Marvin G. Weinbaum

15 February 2006
The London Conference on Afghanistan represents an important stage and a challenge for the United States and the international community: an important stage for it will mark the ending of the Bonn process, and a challenge for it will mark the beginning of the next critical stage in the rebirth of the country after decades of war and destruction.
A lot has been achieved since the moment the Talibans were defeated four years ago by troops commanded by the United States. However, it’s also (...)

"The promised money won’t be enough to help Afghanistan"

by Peter Phillip

15 February 2006
The sum of 20 billion dollars was planned at the London Conference for the next five years. The fourth part of this money is a responsibility of Washington. In the future, this money must go directly to the coffers of the government of Afghanistan. Therefore, we expect the money to be better used. Up to now, the money was for NGOs and the Afghans and international experts are right when they say it is mainly in the hands of the so called advisers and not used in projects. Anyway, nothing (...)

"Another anti-narcotic strategy for Afghanistan"

by Emma Bonino

15 February 2006
From Afghanistan to Italy, crossing Latin America, the “war against drugs” is sacrificed everyday in the altar of demagogy and irrationality. While the “war against drugs” in Afghanistan is marking the time, and mortgaging dramatically the future of the country, the Italian government is taking advantage of the Olympic Games to force the Senate to pass a repressive and dissolute anti-narcotic law. Generally, across the world, the mafia and crime international cartels have good reasons to (...)

Deterrence: What did Jacques Chirac really mean?

by Voltaire Network

Paris (France) | 9 February 2006
Last January 19, French President Jacques Chirac gave an eagerly awaited speech in Landivisiau before France’s strategic air and naval forces. Chirac’s speech, which dealt with the French nuclear doctrine, has been largely discussed and commented by international media outlets which allowed readers to find what they wanted to read about. In the speech, mainly the western media saw the announcement of a French strategic orientation, which from that moment on, would make «terrorism-supporting countries» a potential target for nuclear attacks. That is to say, another step by France towards the Bush doctrine. But, is it really so?

«President Jacques Chirac’s speech during his visit to naval and air strategic forces»

by Jacques Chirac

9 February 2006
It’s a great pleasure for me to meet with women and men, military and civilians, who are involved in a fundamental mission for our independence and security: the nuclear deterrent. Our nuclear deterrent national force was created thanks to our efforts and represents what France is capable of making when a goal is set. I’d like to pay tribute to those experts and military men who were involved, and still are, in those efforts.
The bipolar world is over, but threats against peace have not (...)

«The virtues of the French nuclear deterrent»

by Bruno Tertrais

9 February 2006
In his acceptance speech of the Nobel Prize 2005, economist Thomas Schelling pointed out that the most important event of the last sixty years has been the non use of the nuclear weapon. He made emphasis on how important the nuclear matter was still at the beginning of this XXI century.
The President of the Republic had three good reasons to speak about the role of the French nuclear deterrent on Thursday: deterrence needs a strong and repeated public expression and time had gone by since (...)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |...

Most popular

“Will Russia control Europe thanks to oil?”

“Those Who Are Not with Us Are against Us"

Caricatures and hysteria that disguise the truth

Russia: George Soros’ great offensive reveals the emergency of the energy situation

Orwellian resource to make torture acceptable

Darfur: Simplification and Moralization of the Conflict

Hariri Assassination: No more need for evidence against Syria?

Chile, Bolivia… “responsible” left against “populist” left

You Can Say Yes in France!

Iraq: What does success mean?

After all, it is just a movie…

Barcelona: Report on a Predicted Failure

"Why minimizing the ’Red’ victory?"

Deterrence: What did Jacques Chirac really mean?

Debate on “Islam” Back in the Media