By David Lepeska
The National's weekly Review magazine, Oct 2010
Most of us can’t imagine what it’s like to be Shane Bauer or Josh Fattal, the American hikers stuck for more than a year in Iran’s notorious Evin prison.
But for Roxana Saberi the experience is all too real. An Iranian- American journalist, she’d been living in Tehran six years when Iranian intelligence agents burst into her apartment on January 31, 2009.
They threw her into a car and, after hours of questioning, drove her to Evin and deposited her into a 7’ X 9’ cell with blankets for a bed and the screams of unseen prison-mates for company. During all-day interrogation sessions, her questioners pushed her to “cooperate,” or rather, admit she’d been working as a spy.
“They’re threatening you with the death penalty, life in prison, or finding and harming your family,” she said. “When you’re in that situation every threat is very real. They make you believe they have complete power of your life. Nobody knows where you are, and you know the history of Evin prison.”
She spent 100 days there, but during a recent interview at Doha’s Grand Hyatt hotel, looked none the worse for wear. Elegant and poised, the 33-year-old Saberi retains the ivory skin and mile-high cheekbones of a beauty queen (a former Miss North Dakota, she was among ten finalists in the 1998 Miss America pageant).
After earning two master’s degrees, including one from Cambridge, she moved to her father’s homeland in 2003. She’d carved out a good life in Tehran – freelancing for the BBC and National Public Radio, writing a book about modern Iran and dating a highly regarded Iranian Kurd filmmaker – before the trip to Evin. Her book about the experience, Between Two Worlds: My Life and Captivity in Iran, has received mostly positive notices since it was released in March.
Saberi’s Doha visit was organised by her alma mater, Northwestern University, to meet journalism students at NU-Qatar and deliver a lecture about human rights and Iran. On her first trip back to the region, she felt safe because she was “being looked after.” Sitting in the Hyatt's spacious atrium, she spoke openly and comfortably about her ordeal.
“I gave in pretty early,” Saberi admitted with a sheepish grin. After two days at Evin she confessed, falsely, to spying for the CIA. “I was so ashamed. I thought why couldn’t I at least put up more of a fight.”
Transferred to another cell, Saberi met Silva Harotonian, an Iranian-Armenian health worker who had refused to fold for her interrogators. Saberi became disgusted with herself and decided to speak the truth. “‘What kind of life do I want to live?’” she recalled asking herself at the time. “‘The life in which I know what I did is right.’”
She recanted her confession and later defied her bazju, or lead interrogator, but not before being allowed a phone call to her parents. She told her father she’d been detained for possessing alcohol, as directed by her keepers. Suspicious, he contacted the press, and within days Saberi became a minor international cause celebre: supportive stories appeared on the BBC, The New York Times and elsewhere; the president of the European Union requested proper treatment; the US State Department called for her release. Yet at the end of a classic Iranian “show trial,” she was convicted of espionage and sentenced to eight years in prison. It was just the push she needed.
Saberi, realising she would never get justice, found a new sense of purpose. She appealed her sentence and began a hunger strike. After nine days without meals, she stopped adding sugar to her water.
“Mentally everything’s a little shady and you can’t concentrate and you just wait for the days to pass by,” she said of her two weeks without food. On May 11 her sentence was suspended and she was released, frail and 15 pounds lighter. “What helped me was the feeling of defiance.”
That feeling motivates her work today, as a campaigner for human rights and media freedom. She’s confident the media coverage played a key role in her eventual release, just as international support led to the suspension, last month, of the stoning sentence for Iranian widow Sakineh Mohammadi.
“Even if the international outcry-- governments, organisations, also individuals – doesn’t always lead to the release of prisoners,” she said, “it does at least raise awareness about what is happening and empowers those people in prison and helps them tolerate the harsh conditions.”
Due to her severe treatment, Saberi understood the anger and frustration of the protesters that filled the streets of Tehran a month after her release, in the wake of the contested presidential election.
“I think that the people in power have lost a lot of legitimacy for much of the population,” she said. Because of Iran’s armies of informed, tech-savvy youth and the leadership’s internal bickering, Saberi sees change as “inevitable.” “I think the majority want a democratic government that respects human rights.”
Yet the regime is said to regularly deny those rights. Human Rights Watch has documented dozens of cases of sexual assault, beatings, torture and other forms of abuse in Iran’s prisons. Reporters without Borders recently expressed concern that Iranian prosecutors will request the death penalty for two leading Irani- an bloggers who have been in Evin prison for two years.
And then there’s Fattal and Bauer. The third American hiker, Sarah Shourd, was released from Evin last month after the sultan of Oman took care of her $500,000 bail. Shourd maintains she’s only “one-third free” because her fiancé and friend remain in Evin.
“She is in a very sensitive position because the Iranian authorities are paying attention to what she says,”
said Saberi, who directed the interested to visit www.freethehikers.org.
With the right kind of international support, Fattal and Bauer, like Saberi, might soon be able to appreciate the everyday freedoms most of us take for granted. “To make a phone call when I want,” said Saberi, thinking of things that feel new and precious to her post-Evin, “to eat when I want, to eat what I want, to put my head on a pillow, to turn off the lights at night, to write an email, to surf the internet, to read what I want, to go jogging in the streets, to talk about what happened to me and what’s happened to so many others.”
-----
an edited version appeared in The National's Review, on Oct 1, 2010, www.thenational.ae
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
10.02.2010
2.20.2010
Lessons in diplomatic dexterity
DOHA // On a visit to Qatar this week, the US secretary of state Hillary Clinton met with the Qatari Emir, spoke at a conference on US engagement with the Muslim world and, during a discussion with students, said, “Iran is moving towards a military dictatorship”.
The next day, the Iranian frigate Bandar Abbas docked in Doha harbour and the head of the Qatari armed forces boarded the ship to chat with the captain about boosting military co-operation between the Gulf neighbours.
Considering that the US maintains two military bases here and that US-Iranian tensions have risen to a boil over the past fortnight, some might wonder if Qatar’s left hand knows what the right hand is doing. But for Qatari leaders, maintaining friendly relations with two sabre-rattling rivals is nothing new.
“This is their usual modus operandi,” said Mark Farha, professor of comparative and Middle East politics at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service in Qatar.
“I don’t know if they have much of a choice; If they had snubbed Iran that would open them to a lot of difficulties, and the same with the US,” said Prof Farha, who analyses Qatari foreign policy in a research paper to be published this spring by the Center for International and Strategic Studies. “Qatar did not choose its delicate geopolitical location in the crosshairs of two behemoths.”
Along with considerable natural resource wealth, Qatar’s vital geostrategic locale has helped foster the defining characteristic of its international profile: an openness to dialogue and co-operation.
Prof Farha is well placed to study the phenomenon. He grew up in famously diplomatic Switzerland, his father is Lebanese-American and he earned a PhD in history, Middle East and religious studies at Harvard University. He speaks fluent English and Arabic, along with German and French.
In his forthcoming report, he links Qatar to small but influential states such as Switzerland and Singapore.
“These micro-states share numerous common traits,” writes Prof Farha, “including a limited size, high vulnerability to external shocks, diplomatic dexterity, a salient presence in conflict mediation, record numbers of imported migrant labor, export-led growth, as well as a drive to maintain an efficient infrastructure and a skilled human capital base in highly competitive economies.”
Moreover, all have matured into progressive and stable regional leaders and learnt to punch above their weight internationally.
The trio do have their differences. Switzerland is an established liberal democracy, while Singapore has a form of democracy. Although Qatar held municipal elections in 2007 and is scheduled to hold a legislative vote for Shura Council members in June, its government remains a monarchy.
In terms of economic development, too, Qatar lags behind. But because of a vast natural resource advantage – Qatar holds the world’s third-largest reserves of natural gas – the gap is closing. One example is Education City, managed by Qatari First Lady Sheikha Mozah bint Nasser al Missned’s Qatar Foundation and home to Gulf branches of six respected American universities.
“This type of opening up, it is really to the advantage of the host country,” said Prof Farha.
“Islamic civilisation itself, why did it flourish? It flourished because it was like a sponge, absorbing other cultures and integrating them into a new cultural model – and I think that’s what we have here: there’s a saying in Islam, ‘seek knowledge, even if you have to go as far as China’.”
Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund has ventured far afield as well, making major purchases from London to Ho Chi Minh City. In recent weeks the Qatari government has announced US$2 billion (Dh7.3bn) in mostly infrastructural investments in India and $12bn in economic and cultural investments in Syria.
But as the tensions between Iran and the US increase, it is Qatar’s relationship with Syria’s closest ally, Iran, that bears watching.
The West looks increasingly likely to place sanctions on Iran. If those fail, the next step would perhaps be military action. Prof Farha advises the rivals to take a page from the Qatari playbook.
“The basic Qatari stance – no military escalation, no nuclear proliferation – is not bound to change,” said Prof Farha. “Of all actors, Qatar seems by far to be the most level-headed in this conflict. One can only hope that reason will prevail given that a war would be devastating for the vast majority of parties involved.”
Another analyst pointed out that the US Central Command centre and largest regional air force base are in Qatar.
“If there is any military showdown it won’t be long before these two bases are involved in the conflict,” said Riad Kahwaji, the founder and CEO of the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis, based in Dubai. “Qatar, like other Arab Gulf countries, would find themselves in the middle of any conflict, so it is in their interest to do all they can to get the situation resolved short of a military conflict.”
Prof Farha sees a historical parallel in Switzerland, which co-operated with both the allies and the axis powers during the Second World War. But Qatar has made its mark with engagement as well as peacemaking.
Over the past decade, Qatari leaders have burnished a reputation for diplomacy: from the 2008 Doha Agreement that ended Lebanon’s political crisis to the Doha Round of world trade talks; and from the Doha Debates to ongoing negotiations toward a political settlement in Darfur.
The Qatari identity has become intertwined with an openness to progress and dialogue, according to Prof Farha.
“It started with Sheikha Mozah and the emir and the prime minister, but they now have the support of their community,” said Prof Farha. “Each Gulf state wants to leave its mark, wants to distinguish itself from the other, and this is Qatar’s … If you’ve had one Sheikha Mozah now, you’ll have a whole string of them down the line.”
----
originally appeared in 20 Feb The National, www.thenational.ae
The next day, the Iranian frigate Bandar Abbas docked in Doha harbour and the head of the Qatari armed forces boarded the ship to chat with the captain about boosting military co-operation between the Gulf neighbours.
Considering that the US maintains two military bases here and that US-Iranian tensions have risen to a boil over the past fortnight, some might wonder if Qatar’s left hand knows what the right hand is doing. But for Qatari leaders, maintaining friendly relations with two sabre-rattling rivals is nothing new.
“This is their usual modus operandi,” said Mark Farha, professor of comparative and Middle East politics at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service in Qatar.
“I don’t know if they have much of a choice; If they had snubbed Iran that would open them to a lot of difficulties, and the same with the US,” said Prof Farha, who analyses Qatari foreign policy in a research paper to be published this spring by the Center for International and Strategic Studies. “Qatar did not choose its delicate geopolitical location in the crosshairs of two behemoths.”
Along with considerable natural resource wealth, Qatar’s vital geostrategic locale has helped foster the defining characteristic of its international profile: an openness to dialogue and co-operation.
Prof Farha is well placed to study the phenomenon. He grew up in famously diplomatic Switzerland, his father is Lebanese-American and he earned a PhD in history, Middle East and religious studies at Harvard University. He speaks fluent English and Arabic, along with German and French.
In his forthcoming report, he links Qatar to small but influential states such as Switzerland and Singapore.
“These micro-states share numerous common traits,” writes Prof Farha, “including a limited size, high vulnerability to external shocks, diplomatic dexterity, a salient presence in conflict mediation, record numbers of imported migrant labor, export-led growth, as well as a drive to maintain an efficient infrastructure and a skilled human capital base in highly competitive economies.”
Moreover, all have matured into progressive and stable regional leaders and learnt to punch above their weight internationally.
The trio do have their differences. Switzerland is an established liberal democracy, while Singapore has a form of democracy. Although Qatar held municipal elections in 2007 and is scheduled to hold a legislative vote for Shura Council members in June, its government remains a monarchy.
In terms of economic development, too, Qatar lags behind. But because of a vast natural resource advantage – Qatar holds the world’s third-largest reserves of natural gas – the gap is closing. One example is Education City, managed by Qatari First Lady Sheikha Mozah bint Nasser al Missned’s Qatar Foundation and home to Gulf branches of six respected American universities.
“This type of opening up, it is really to the advantage of the host country,” said Prof Farha.
“Islamic civilisation itself, why did it flourish? It flourished because it was like a sponge, absorbing other cultures and integrating them into a new cultural model – and I think that’s what we have here: there’s a saying in Islam, ‘seek knowledge, even if you have to go as far as China’.”
Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund has ventured far afield as well, making major purchases from London to Ho Chi Minh City. In recent weeks the Qatari government has announced US$2 billion (Dh7.3bn) in mostly infrastructural investments in India and $12bn in economic and cultural investments in Syria.
But as the tensions between Iran and the US increase, it is Qatar’s relationship with Syria’s closest ally, Iran, that bears watching.
The West looks increasingly likely to place sanctions on Iran. If those fail, the next step would perhaps be military action. Prof Farha advises the rivals to take a page from the Qatari playbook.
“The basic Qatari stance – no military escalation, no nuclear proliferation – is not bound to change,” said Prof Farha. “Of all actors, Qatar seems by far to be the most level-headed in this conflict. One can only hope that reason will prevail given that a war would be devastating for the vast majority of parties involved.”
Another analyst pointed out that the US Central Command centre and largest regional air force base are in Qatar.
“If there is any military showdown it won’t be long before these two bases are involved in the conflict,” said Riad Kahwaji, the founder and CEO of the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis, based in Dubai. “Qatar, like other Arab Gulf countries, would find themselves in the middle of any conflict, so it is in their interest to do all they can to get the situation resolved short of a military conflict.”
Prof Farha sees a historical parallel in Switzerland, which co-operated with both the allies and the axis powers during the Second World War. But Qatar has made its mark with engagement as well as peacemaking.
Over the past decade, Qatari leaders have burnished a reputation for diplomacy: from the 2008 Doha Agreement that ended Lebanon’s political crisis to the Doha Round of world trade talks; and from the Doha Debates to ongoing negotiations toward a political settlement in Darfur.
The Qatari identity has become intertwined with an openness to progress and dialogue, according to Prof Farha.
“It started with Sheikha Mozah and the emir and the prime minister, but they now have the support of their community,” said Prof Farha. “Each Gulf state wants to leave its mark, wants to distinguish itself from the other, and this is Qatar’s … If you’ve had one Sheikha Mozah now, you’ll have a whole string of them down the line.”
----
originally appeared in 20 Feb The National, www.thenational.ae
2.17.2010
Hillary busts out the "D" word on Iran
DOHA // The US secretary of state deployed the Obama administration’s harshest critique yet of Tehran yesterday, saying the country was growing into a military dictatorship.
“Iran is moving toward a military dictatorship – that is our view,” Hillary Clinton said during a town hall-style meeting with students at Education City here. She explained that any future sanctions against Iran would target “the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which we believe is in effect supplanting the government of Iran”.
As she visits the region to rally support for increasing pressure on Iran, Mrs Clinton’s rhetoric might mark the start of a tenser phase in the West’s nuclear stand-off with the Islamic Republic.
“It is very understandable that the US is expressing deep frustration,” said Hady Amr, director of Brookings Doha, the Qatar branch of a US think tank. “It’s no longer just about the nuclear programme; it’s also frustration with how the regime has responded to the aftermath of the elections.”
After Iran’s presidential elections in June, a mass uprising calling for votes to be recounted was forcibly silenced with beatings, arrests, detention and, in recent months, executions. The repression continued last week with the smothering of protests during anniversary celebrations of the Iranian Revolution.
That same day last week, the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, announced that the country had successfully enriched uranium to a 20-per-cent level needed to fuel a medical research reactor. “The US is trying to signal,” Mr Amr added, “that it’s not really willing to wait a lot longer before it changes its policy.”
Yesterday, however, the director of Iran’s atomic energy organisation, Ali Akbar Salehi, said that the major world powers with which it is at loggerheads over the issue have made a new offer to Iran for a supply of nuclear fuel in return for its shipping out of most of its stocks of low-enriched uranium.
“After the decision by Iran to produce its own uranium enriched to 20 per cent, France, Russia and the United States presented a new proposal which we are in the process of considering,” Mr Salehi said, according to the ILNA news agency.
He gave no details of the new offer. France quickly denied yesterday that such an offer even existed.
Mrs Clinton is spearheading the Obama administration’s full-court press of the region this week, meeting with the leaders of Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Along with the UAE, Kuwait and Bahrain, Qatar is one of four Gulf countries that accepted US missile-defence systems designed to shoot down short-range Iranian missiles.
“They worry about Iran’s intentions, they worry about whether Iran will be a good neighbour,” Mrs Clinton said. “The question is what can Iran do in order to allay the worries and the fears of its neighbours … and yet I don’t see much progress there.”
Beyond Iran, Mrs Clinton’s discussion topics with the students included US-Islam engagement and building a dialogue with Muslim youth. “We will not agree on everything. I don’t think any family agrees on everything,” Mrs Clinton said. “What I look for are ways that we can celebrate our differences but narrow our disagreements and find common cause.”
Some expressed doubts about the US ability to eradicate stereotypes and move beyond rancour. Mrs Clinton said it would be up to the next generation to bridge the divide. “The decisions that are made here at Education City and in my own country are really about what kind of future we will help provide for those of you who are students today. The education you are receiving here is absolutely critical. The important thing is not what you wear, but what’s in your head and your heart.”
Farah Pandith, the US state department’s first special representative to Muslim communities, who joined Mrs Clinton at Education City, highlighted the potential of today’s young Muslims.
“Every single day since 9/12, on the page of every magazine or newspaper around the world, you see Islam defined in a particular way,” Ms Pandith on Saturday at the US-Islamic World Forum, which concluded here yesterday. “This generation is having to navigate through that and understand what it means to be modern and Muslim – and also is really searching for a way to be connected.”
She urged businesses and foundations to invest in Muslim youth, to listen to their ideas and help them innovate and build partnerships. “New media are playing a gigantic role in what these young people are hearing,” said Ms Pandith, referring to them as the “social network generation”.
“There is really something going on right now with young people, and if we do not harness what is taking place with the youth demographic we will have missed this unbelievably important window.”
Amr Khaled, an Egyptian televangelist and one of the most influential Muslim voices, also worried about Muslim youth. He called on the United States to launch a “Project for Love”, and invest US$10 billion (Dh36.7bn) over five years on education, poverty and health in the Muslim world.
“America is fighting already wars against terror and injustice, why not a third?” Mr Khaled said. “Millions of Muslim youth will stretch out their hands to you.”
At a Sunday morning panel, the Malaysian opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim, urged Barack Obama to engage smartly. “Yes, President Obama, engage with hope, but you must engage the aspirations of the whole people,” he said, pointing the inclusion of leaders, non-governmental organisations, intellectuals, Islamists and secularists. “Because if you miss some of them, you will have a continuation of this problem.”
-------
an edited version of this story appeared on page 1A of the 16 Feb edition of The National, www.thenational.ae
“Iran is moving toward a military dictatorship – that is our view,” Hillary Clinton said during a town hall-style meeting with students at Education City here. She explained that any future sanctions against Iran would target “the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which we believe is in effect supplanting the government of Iran”.
As she visits the region to rally support for increasing pressure on Iran, Mrs Clinton’s rhetoric might mark the start of a tenser phase in the West’s nuclear stand-off with the Islamic Republic.
“It is very understandable that the US is expressing deep frustration,” said Hady Amr, director of Brookings Doha, the Qatar branch of a US think tank. “It’s no longer just about the nuclear programme; it’s also frustration with how the regime has responded to the aftermath of the elections.”
After Iran’s presidential elections in June, a mass uprising calling for votes to be recounted was forcibly silenced with beatings, arrests, detention and, in recent months, executions. The repression continued last week with the smothering of protests during anniversary celebrations of the Iranian Revolution.
That same day last week, the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, announced that the country had successfully enriched uranium to a 20-per-cent level needed to fuel a medical research reactor. “The US is trying to signal,” Mr Amr added, “that it’s not really willing to wait a lot longer before it changes its policy.”
Yesterday, however, the director of Iran’s atomic energy organisation, Ali Akbar Salehi, said that the major world powers with which it is at loggerheads over the issue have made a new offer to Iran for a supply of nuclear fuel in return for its shipping out of most of its stocks of low-enriched uranium.
“After the decision by Iran to produce its own uranium enriched to 20 per cent, France, Russia and the United States presented a new proposal which we are in the process of considering,” Mr Salehi said, according to the ILNA news agency.
He gave no details of the new offer. France quickly denied yesterday that such an offer even existed.
Mrs Clinton is spearheading the Obama administration’s full-court press of the region this week, meeting with the leaders of Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Along with the UAE, Kuwait and Bahrain, Qatar is one of four Gulf countries that accepted US missile-defence systems designed to shoot down short-range Iranian missiles.
“They worry about Iran’s intentions, they worry about whether Iran will be a good neighbour,” Mrs Clinton said. “The question is what can Iran do in order to allay the worries and the fears of its neighbours … and yet I don’t see much progress there.”
Beyond Iran, Mrs Clinton’s discussion topics with the students included US-Islam engagement and building a dialogue with Muslim youth. “We will not agree on everything. I don’t think any family agrees on everything,” Mrs Clinton said. “What I look for are ways that we can celebrate our differences but narrow our disagreements and find common cause.”
Some expressed doubts about the US ability to eradicate stereotypes and move beyond rancour. Mrs Clinton said it would be up to the next generation to bridge the divide. “The decisions that are made here at Education City and in my own country are really about what kind of future we will help provide for those of you who are students today. The education you are receiving here is absolutely critical. The important thing is not what you wear, but what’s in your head and your heart.”
Farah Pandith, the US state department’s first special representative to Muslim communities, who joined Mrs Clinton at Education City, highlighted the potential of today’s young Muslims.
“Every single day since 9/12, on the page of every magazine or newspaper around the world, you see Islam defined in a particular way,” Ms Pandith on Saturday at the US-Islamic World Forum, which concluded here yesterday. “This generation is having to navigate through that and understand what it means to be modern and Muslim – and also is really searching for a way to be connected.”
She urged businesses and foundations to invest in Muslim youth, to listen to their ideas and help them innovate and build partnerships. “New media are playing a gigantic role in what these young people are hearing,” said Ms Pandith, referring to them as the “social network generation”.
“There is really something going on right now with young people, and if we do not harness what is taking place with the youth demographic we will have missed this unbelievably important window.”
Amr Khaled, an Egyptian televangelist and one of the most influential Muslim voices, also worried about Muslim youth. He called on the United States to launch a “Project for Love”, and invest US$10 billion (Dh36.7bn) over five years on education, poverty and health in the Muslim world.
“America is fighting already wars against terror and injustice, why not a third?” Mr Khaled said. “Millions of Muslim youth will stretch out their hands to you.”
At a Sunday morning panel, the Malaysian opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim, urged Barack Obama to engage smartly. “Yes, President Obama, engage with hope, but you must engage the aspirations of the whole people,” he said, pointing the inclusion of leaders, non-governmental organisations, intellectuals, Islamists and secularists. “Because if you miss some of them, you will have a continuation of this problem.”
-------
an edited version of this story appeared on page 1A of the 16 Feb edition of The National, www.thenational.ae
11.13.2009
Q & A Show's Value Beyond Debate
By David Lepeska
DOHA // During the question and answer session of this week’s Doha Debates, a Qatari student named Donna stood and asked one of the guest analysts a tough question about political trust, then pressed him to give an honest response. The exchange begged the question: why don’t we have many TV shows like this in the United States?
The thought seems revolutionary. The common wisdom is that it is Arab countries that lag behind, with poor education, little freedom of expression and a dearth of quality entertainment. There is some truth to these beliefs.
But consider that on American television this week, Oprah’s karaoke contest came down to three finalists, Tyra Banks, supermodel turned talk show host, wondered if you’d like to try The Tapeworm Diet, and The Jerry Springer Show asked the eternal question, “My Cousin’s Baby is Yours?”
Yes, US television has some intelligent programming, such as the Emmy-winning The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and Charlie Rose on PBS. The BBC, which manages and broadcasts The Doha Debates, is a world leader in news and entertainment programming.
But The Doha Debates is financed entirely by the Qatar Foundation and the majority of its speakers and audience are of Arab origin. It is an Arab production, one that regularly hosts illuminating and often heated discussions on some of the most pressing topics of the day, including extremism, women’s rights and the occupation of Iraq.
It is also closing in on its 50th episode, and with its appeal to the region’s youth, it may be creating a new image of Arab intellectualism.
“In some ways the show has exceeded our expectations,” said the show’s host and founder, Tim Sebastian, who hosted the BBC’s HARDtalk interview show for decades.
The Doha Debates is the BBC’s most popular weekend programme, according to producer Tanya Sakzewski, and the show’s website is among its most visited. This week The Doha Debates rolled out an Arabic-language website, where episodes can be viewed with Arabic subtitles.
At least 2,000 Arab and Qatari students have attended debating classes at QatarDebate, a national debating society established in September 2007 in response to the show’s success. The Qatar Foundation recently launched an Arabic-language student debate show, Lakom Al Karar (“The Decision is Yours”) and Doha will be host to the World Schools Debate Championship in February. Debating clubs have sprung up not just in Doha, but in Saudi Arabia and at a Palestinian university.
This in a region with a rich intellectual history and tradition of debate that many -- especially in the West -- assume has been lost in today's more conservative societies.
“In a sense, this is a giant leap backwards – and that’s a good thing,” added Sebastian. “These young people are questioning, probing, arming themselves with good questions and being dogged about getting answers.”
This week’s motion,“this house trusts Iran not to build a nuclear bomb”, could hardly be more timely. The international community has been pressing Iran on a UN-brokered plan to swap its low-enriched uranium for nuclear fuel. Iran agreed to the deal last month in Vienna but has wavered, hinting that it does not trust western negotiators to keep up their end of the bargain.
The opinions expressed were wide-ranging, belying the “Arab Street” myth of ideological uniformity that lingers in much of the West. “One of the surprising things is Arab diversity, in terms of opinion,” said Sebastian. “We used to be able to tell by dress how people would vote. Now we rarely have any idea.”
Iran and its nuclear ambitions have long been a grave concern in the Gulf. Arguing for the motion, Mr Marandi placed Iran’s nuclear energy programme in the broader framework of breaking the western monopoly on advanced research and technologies.
“We should question the motives of those countries who have and use nuclear weapons,” said Seyyed Mohammad Marandi, head of North American studies at the University of Tehran. “While Iran is the world’s biggest victim of WMD’s, it is very revealing that it has never produced chemical weapons, because Iran deems them immoral.”
An Egyptian student named Rama braved catcalls to voice a potentially controversial query: “How can we trust that any Supreme Leader, present or future, will not issue a fatwa saying it is a Muslim duty to nuke or attack any nation?”
Alireza Nourizadeh, director of the Centre for Arab and Iranian Studies in London, argued against the motion. “How can you trust a government who kills its own people?” he asked.
“Where is your evidence?” asked Sebastian.
“I’m not going to disclose my evidence here,” said Mr Nourizadeh.
“Well then it doesn’t sound very credible, does it?” said Sebastian, earning titters from a studio audience made up mostly of local high school and university students.
That audience seemed to side with Mr Nourizadeh, as 52 per cent voted against the motion. But a Qatari student who voted in favour was unfazed. “I like how this reveals two sides to every question,” said Ahmed al Malik, 18. “We can express both sides, and understand the issues better.”
Sebastian saw the ground shifting.
“You’d be hard-pressed to walk down Oxford Street in London,” he said, “and find students that would rather go debate than spend the day shopping.”
-- edited version appeared in The National, 13 Nov 2009.
DOHA // During the question and answer session of this week’s Doha Debates, a Qatari student named Donna stood and asked one of the guest analysts a tough question about political trust, then pressed him to give an honest response. The exchange begged the question: why don’t we have many TV shows like this in the United States?
The thought seems revolutionary. The common wisdom is that it is Arab countries that lag behind, with poor education, little freedom of expression and a dearth of quality entertainment. There is some truth to these beliefs.
But consider that on American television this week, Oprah’s karaoke contest came down to three finalists, Tyra Banks, supermodel turned talk show host, wondered if you’d like to try The Tapeworm Diet, and The Jerry Springer Show asked the eternal question, “My Cousin’s Baby is Yours?”
Yes, US television has some intelligent programming, such as the Emmy-winning The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and Charlie Rose on PBS. The BBC, which manages and broadcasts The Doha Debates, is a world leader in news and entertainment programming.
But The Doha Debates is financed entirely by the Qatar Foundation and the majority of its speakers and audience are of Arab origin. It is an Arab production, one that regularly hosts illuminating and often heated discussions on some of the most pressing topics of the day, including extremism, women’s rights and the occupation of Iraq.
It is also closing in on its 50th episode, and with its appeal to the region’s youth, it may be creating a new image of Arab intellectualism.
“In some ways the show has exceeded our expectations,” said the show’s host and founder, Tim Sebastian, who hosted the BBC’s HARDtalk interview show for decades.
The Doha Debates is the BBC’s most popular weekend programme, according to producer Tanya Sakzewski, and the show’s website is among its most visited. This week The Doha Debates rolled out an Arabic-language website, where episodes can be viewed with Arabic subtitles.
At least 2,000 Arab and Qatari students have attended debating classes at QatarDebate, a national debating society established in September 2007 in response to the show’s success. The Qatar Foundation recently launched an Arabic-language student debate show, Lakom Al Karar (“The Decision is Yours”) and Doha will be host to the World Schools Debate Championship in February. Debating clubs have sprung up not just in Doha, but in Saudi Arabia and at a Palestinian university.
This in a region with a rich intellectual history and tradition of debate that many -- especially in the West -- assume has been lost in today's more conservative societies.
“In a sense, this is a giant leap backwards – and that’s a good thing,” added Sebastian. “These young people are questioning, probing, arming themselves with good questions and being dogged about getting answers.”
This week’s motion,“this house trusts Iran not to build a nuclear bomb”, could hardly be more timely. The international community has been pressing Iran on a UN-brokered plan to swap its low-enriched uranium for nuclear fuel. Iran agreed to the deal last month in Vienna but has wavered, hinting that it does not trust western negotiators to keep up their end of the bargain.
The opinions expressed were wide-ranging, belying the “Arab Street” myth of ideological uniformity that lingers in much of the West. “One of the surprising things is Arab diversity, in terms of opinion,” said Sebastian. “We used to be able to tell by dress how people would vote. Now we rarely have any idea.”
Iran and its nuclear ambitions have long been a grave concern in the Gulf. Arguing for the motion, Mr Marandi placed Iran’s nuclear energy programme in the broader framework of breaking the western monopoly on advanced research and technologies.
“We should question the motives of those countries who have and use nuclear weapons,” said Seyyed Mohammad Marandi, head of North American studies at the University of Tehran. “While Iran is the world’s biggest victim of WMD’s, it is very revealing that it has never produced chemical weapons, because Iran deems them immoral.”
An Egyptian student named Rama braved catcalls to voice a potentially controversial query: “How can we trust that any Supreme Leader, present or future, will not issue a fatwa saying it is a Muslim duty to nuke or attack any nation?”
Alireza Nourizadeh, director of the Centre for Arab and Iranian Studies in London, argued against the motion. “How can you trust a government who kills its own people?” he asked.
“Where is your evidence?” asked Sebastian.
“I’m not going to disclose my evidence here,” said Mr Nourizadeh.
“Well then it doesn’t sound very credible, does it?” said Sebastian, earning titters from a studio audience made up mostly of local high school and university students.
That audience seemed to side with Mr Nourizadeh, as 52 per cent voted against the motion. But a Qatari student who voted in favour was unfazed. “I like how this reveals two sides to every question,” said Ahmed al Malik, 18. “We can express both sides, and understand the issues better.”
Sebastian saw the ground shifting.
“You’d be hard-pressed to walk down Oxford Street in London,” he said, “and find students that would rather go debate than spend the day shopping.”
-- edited version appeared in The National, 13 Nov 2009.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)