Dickinson ROTC urges for productive dialogue

My friend, a member of Dickinson ROTC posted this video in response to both a YouTube video posted against ROTC and the Osama death rallies as well as in response to having his house (the ROTC house) broken into and scattered with hurtful and accusatory signs. I think he states the problem and the need for dialogue very well. I wish it was more videos like this that represented Dickinson, rather than the unfortunate footage of the celebrations.

I would sincerely urge anyone who has been angered or upset by the reactions to Osama bin Laden's death to talk to him and other members of ROTC. I think open dialogue (truly open, not just pretending to be open) is important on both sides of this issue. I think this video reaches out in a very respectful way.

Those in the opposition who posted the original video have removed it. I kind of wish it were still up so I could see that statement as well, but perhaps in retrospect, the makers of the video were not proud of its content.

I myself feel fairly middle of the road on this event. I was not out there screaming or celebrating, though I understood it, and I also was not one to angrily voice my disgust, though I felt some of that as well. I have friends on both side.

I have been more impressed by the conversations I've had in all my classes about the event on Sunday May 1st than by the event itself. I have heard people with dissenting opinions speak so eloquently about their position rather than spewing hateful rhetoric (which I mentioned in my last post). I wish these conversations could be the videos and images that represent us. People have become more reflective since the event and I am proud to see a true dialogue taking place. I hope it continues and I am able to take part in it further. It is a great chance for our campus to grow and I am seeing people take advantage of that. Please be one of the helpers, not an agitator, it does not mean you have to give up any of your beliefs, just to listen.

I could do well in following my own advice as well.

Spoke too soon

I seem to have spoken too quickly. At Dickinson college alone, people have fractured into the celebrators and those disgusted, hurt and embarrassed by the celebrating. I do not fall clearly into either category. While I find fault with the drunken, shirtless boys running around using this as an excuse to party and celebrate, I also find fault with people throwing the words "riot" and "fascist" around. First of all, fascism as defined by Merriam Webster Dictionary online as:  


"a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition". 


Anyone who calls this act against Bin Laden a result of fascism in the US is simply wrong. I do not come down hard on many reasonable opinions, but calling celebrators fascist is utterly incorrect. Bin Laden declared war on the U.S. By doing that and by killing thousands, he became an enemy and a target for the U.S. His killing in a military operation is, by the law, legitimate. That being said, there is still a reason I am unable to celebrate death, but lets not get issues confused here.


Ironically, I found most of the people yelling "go home fascists" to the celebrators were people who (let's face it) probably voted for Obama. Obama gave the order to take Bin Laden down, and now republicans, who may not have supported him in the past, respect him for those orders. If you love Obama so much and would never call him a fascist, how are those who celebrate an action he ordered be?


I hate to come off harsh, but I kinda have the feeling no one reads this anyway. Anyway, clearly its a whirlwind of emotion for everyone involved, but the two extreme groups I am finding coming out scare me more than anyone who is simply happy that Bin Laden is dead...

Osama Bin Laden... Dead

So by now, I'm sure everyone has heard, but as was just confirmed by our president a couple minutes ago, Osama Bin Laden is dead.

He had been hiding in a mansion in Pakistan and today an operation was undertaken to storm this residence and Osama Bin Laden was killed after enduring a fire fight and his body was seized by U.S. military operatives. His death is confirmed and the country has heaved more than just a sigh of relief and now raises their voice in celebration. It is a day many have been waiting for.

I struggle a bit, perhaps it's the religious side of me, in celebrating. I must first disclaim and say that I am whole-heartedly glad, relieved and feel as though justice has been done with Bin Laden's most deserved death. That being said the concept of celebrating a death, even of the most evil, and horrific man ever is difficult for me. I also completely understand the instinct to celebrate, people need something concrete, some real justice or hope to hold on to in this world that we live in, and that I support. Perhaps the best way to describe it is that I am saddened by his life, and gladdened by his death. He caused so much death and destructive in his life and it is better for all that it is over, but the life he lived was truly sad and pathetic.

Now the concern is that his supporters will strike back, naming him a martyr and retaliating against the U.S. It is a legitimate concern, but what does comfort me is the fact that the Pakistani government offered the U.S. support in this operation. In the next few days, more information will begin to emerge I'm sure, and the best part of Obama's speech was in calling for America to unite again as it did after 9/11. Perhaps that kind of unity can stick beyond events such as great tragedies and great successes in our country. On this night, Conservatives and Liberals and all those in between and beyond have come together in relief and in the celebration of justice.


I am curious to see how the rest of the world, especially the Middle Eastern and Arab world responds and reacts to this. Not the extremists, but the true people.

We will learn a lot in the coming days I'm sure. Keeping my eyes and ears open.

Syrian Media Project

“International organizations have described the human rights status in Syria as being one of the worst in the world, with security forces having a long history of harassing and imprisoning rights activists and critics of the government.” ---Al Jazeera


When our group chose Syria, it was really because most of us knew very little about their media system. Now I understand why. Although protests and death tolls in Syria have been flooding the international news as of late, media within the country is very difficult to follow.


This is because censorship in the Syrian media is one of the most severe in the world. The government imposes serious restrictions on the state press. Journalists have to apply for licenses from the government in order to write anything, and even then, that license can be revoked at anytime due to controversy in its content. This is allowed under emergency laws that have been in since 1963. If any information is deemed 'a threat to public safety and security' it will be removed at the will of government officials such as the Minister of Information or Minister of Culture.


Not only does state-imposed censorship occur, but cultural and social censorship as well. Many independent TV stations will not show programs which they find unfit for the public. This may be due to fear or a strong feeling of responsibility to protect social, cultural and religious integrity.


The problem with the movement in Syria right now (despite social media and access to information being severely restricted) is that, unlike Egypt and Tunisia, the movement is highly fractured. The entire populace is not in support of the protests, in fact there are Assad loyalists that are working to undermine the effectiveness of social media. For example, loyalists are flooding Twitter with the common hashtags #Syria, #Daraa and #Mar15 that have been used by protestors, in order to draw attention away from the protestor's point of view and get more of the loyalist perspective out there.


I find it really interesting that since Twitter and Facebook have come to represent a great tool for dissenters and protestors now the opposition is adjusting to combat this. Since censorship and restrictions can only go so far, now enemies of the revolution are working within social media to gain support for their cause. 


It's amazing how quickly people have learned to adapt to such a situation. This project has truly opened my eyes about Syria specifically and I really can't wait to compare our findings with the other group's findings about their countries in the same region.


Big things to look out for. Things are not always as they seem. We used to think we could get an accurate perspective of people just by reading Twitter, now we must look deeper in what we thought was so honest to stuff below the surface, such as flooding Twitter to manipulate hashtag searches and represent a small loyalist group on a larger scale so they appear bigger than they are.


Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but if the common public is blocked from Twitter, how do you think these loyalists are getting their Tweets out? 


Food for thought.

The Gay Identity in the Middle East

Video about Gay Palestinians in Israel:

We were presented with this really interesting video in class which explores how young homosexual Palestinians living in and around Israel are trying to find their place in society. The challenge to their identity is multi-faceted. Not only do these people feel condemned by the Islamic religion which is predominant in most Arab countries for being gay, but they also feel condemned in Israel for being Palestinians. Their many identities seem to contradict each other which leaves many people feeling lost. The issue of sexuality aside, I'm sure any Arab who is also Israeli or any Jewish person in parts of the Arab world feel uncomfortable and as though the everyday identity they display does not reflect who they truly are. This is because one feels they must hold back truths, whether they are religious, political or sexual.

The idea of exploring a more progressive approach to sexuality in the Middle East sadly seems to be a long-shot. Although America prides itself on equality, I'm sure every American homosexual has still experienced social injustice or prejudice and that is in a place where individual rights and preferences are not outlawed. In much of the Middle East any homosexual PDA is actually illegal. It has taken us a long time to come to a place of better understanding and acceptance and even we have a long way to go. I can't imagine how must young people feel if their entire society actually outlaws what they feel in their hearts. This can be true for any difficult identity one tries to accept about themselves, but I really sympathize for those who could never imagine a life without keeping that part of you a secret. This will be an interesting issue to watch develop and hopefully videos like this will at the very least raise awareness about the issue itself. Thoughts?

Libya and International Support

This is a video posted by another student in my MENA class which I wanted to share with any readers outside of my Dickinson classmates. It's really interesting and good at displaying the kind of support the rebels have been given as well as giving the situation of politicians and newspapers a face on the ground. So many people are continuing to die, but the spirits of the people still seem fairly high.

U.S. and Libyan Relations

I just finished a briefing paper for my American Foreign Policy class which chronicled the history of U.S. relations with Libya under both King Idris I and now leader Muammar Gadhafi. The paper called for a policy recommendation section at the end which really forced me to look at what the U.S. should do/continue doing. The U.S's past with Gadhafi has been extremely tumultuous, and the more research I did, reading interviews given by Gadhafi himself from the 1980s through 2002, the more I realized what a great opportunity this is for Libya as well as a great opportunity to redeem better relations between the two countries.

After imposing economic sanctions, bombing Tripoli and Benghazi under Reagan and enduring situations like the Libyan bombing of flight Pan Am 103 which killed nearly 200 Americans, the U.S. completely isolated Libya, isolating practices which was later endorsed by UNSC resolutions. The country has gone through a lot and now with the gross human rights violations committed by Gadhafi, this revolution offers great hope for future generations of both Libyans and Americans and their relationship together.

So there is good news and bad news to this situation:

The good news is that the U.S. has played it smart in offering technical assistance, training and air support but has kept their objectives limited without deploying ground troops and on March 30th relinquished the responsibility of leading the international coalition to NATO. The fact that such multi-lateral efforts are being employed on the behalf of the Libyan rebels is very encouraging. A sense of Arab unity over this conflict has swept the region as the Arab League and many individual Arab countries have actively come out in support of the Rebels. Among these main supporters are Egypt, who have supplied arms, and Qatar and the UAE who have both taking leading roles in enforcing the UN sanctioned "no-fly" zone. Just recently Abdul-Ati al-Obeidi, former Libyan prime minister is rumored to be in talks with the UN and the West in order to put an end to air strikes.

Now for the bad news.
Gadhafi has adapted his military tactics now, bringing his strikes to the ground since the "no-fly" zone has made air strikes more difficult. In this way, it is almost as if he is daring the U.S. and UN to send in ground troops, which was rejected as a possibility even before these parties engaged. The struggle between the rebels, who are based out of Benghazi (a city that has undergone heavy bombing of civilians), and Gadhafi military and loyalists is constantly in flux. It is hard to tell who has the upper hand from one day to the next. Unfortunately, despite U.S. efforts to offer support, the Libyan rebels have criticized the U.S. NATO, and the UN for not being active enough in their fight. Just 3 days ago Obama released an Op-Ed with other Western leaders reiterating the objectives of their support but more strongly emphasizing the necessity for Gadhafi to disappear.

So here we are. We are presented with a challenge. My personal feeling is that no ground troops should be deployed because the integrity of the revolution being a Libyan "bottom-up" revolution must be preserved. That being said, I would hope other countries who are a part of the international coalition might step up in more of a leading role as the U.S. is unable to offer that at this time due to involvement in two other costly conflicts. Interests are there, and I'm not just talking about oil. Interests in the people being able to take back their country and instill a democracy that may endure independent from U.S. construction. I think that is the only way democracy can endure. I would urge Israel, who has offered some support to the rebels to continue to support them as not only is it the right thing to do, but it improves Israel's image in the region and may open the door for a future alliance with Libyan leaders who will be decided after this conflict if Gadhafi is ousted.

One things for sure, Gadhafi must go, and the entire international community, the Arab world and Libyan people are in agreement on that.

Now what happens next to ensure this outcome? I wish I knew.