Eldon-Online

Believe What You Want

Perhaps it's not so odd that a person who is not particularly religious should choose a day like today to think about beliefs! Here we are, a Public Holiday in the Western world and a normal weekend in the Arab world! A happy coincidence for believers in Christianity who today celebrate Christmas and who live in a Moslem country where December 25th and a Friday will only happen four more times in the next 30 years. 

 I actually only started to think about it when I got a call from Dubai today, and then thought back on some of the changes that have taken place in our world over the last few decades. How parts of a majority Christian country like Britain have decided that to celebrate Christmas is discriminatory against the minority who choose to believe in other things. How it seems no longer appropriate to wish people a Merry Christmas, in case they are not believers in Christ, and default to a tamer Happy New Year instead (even though this particular New Year is based on a calendar introduced by a Catholic Pope (actually, aren't all Popes Catholic?).

It is a sad reflection on a world where, after centuries of having been ravaged by wars that have had a basis in religious beliefs, we still don't seem to have learnt one of the basic tenets of every one of those religions - tolerance and an understanding of others. 

The most recent case in point? Perhaps the fact that the Swiss, in their open transparent and democratic way,have exercised their right to ban the building of minarets in Switzerland. A motion so clearly passed, despite opposition by the Government, the mainstream political parties, religious groups and business interests, that it highlights the increasing rise of right wing nationalism in Europe. A worrying trend.

But the move was applauded in other countries in Europe, so I wondered in this particular case whether it was actually all about nationalism, or are people just getting fed up with being asked to tolerate this and that - against their own beliefs? I know that various commentators since the referendum have called the vote an "attack on religious freedom". I would ask those same commentators to ask the Saudi Arabian authorities to let them know how many churches have been allowed in Saudi Arabia. The answer will be zero. And I recall a building in Riyadh having to be modified when I was there because part of the structure resembled a religious cross.

Ask those same people what they think of the various "laws" by which other religions abide. The death penalty by beheading, removal of limbs, stoning and, in a recent "judgement" the removal of tongues and ears. I presume that this is included and approved of in the "religious freedom" they talk about.

I am all in favour of allowing people to believe in whatever they choose to believe. And if they are a guest in someone else's country they should respect the rules and the laws of their hosts. But all too often now, people in various countries are being asked to bow to the wishes of the new minorities - without any form of reciprocation. Perhaps if Saudi Arabia allowed churches, Switzerland might be inclined to allow minarets.

When I lived in Malaysia I was struck by the fact that at Hari Raya (Eid), everyone joined in - Muslim, Hindu and Christian as well as anyone else. It was the same for Christmas and Diwali. Despite the occasional Government rhetoric, it was a pretty harmonious society.

But today we increasingly live in a world of intolerance. This is the wrong direction, surely, no matter what our beliefs. Don't we all want to live in a peaceful and harmonious world?  If we don't I would suggest there is something wrong with us.

Isn't it about time we were all allowed to believe in whatever we want to believe in?  To do so sensitively - but not to try and impose your beliefs on others.

It is just past midnight on the 25th of December. A little early for a New Year Resolution, but one that might be just worth thinking about. 

WMD; Weapons Or Words?

The term WMD, in recent history, came to be known as an abbreviation for Weapons of Mass Destruction. Those things that the Americans said existed in Iraq, who dragged the British along with them into a war which rid the world of a dictator, but left a legacy of internal conflict in the country that shows no signs of abating. Oh, and just as an aside there didn't seem to be any WMDs - strange that!

On the other hand we have the North Koreans who most definitely do have WMDs, and a dictator, but nobody seems terribly interested in knocking him on the head and giving that country a chance of escaping from abject poverty and starvation. Where's the justice in that - or did everyone wake up to the idea that invading Iraq under some pretext or other was just wrong? Mind you, Iraq had oil - North Korea doesn't.

But it occurs to me that WMD could just as easily stand for Words of Mass Destruction - at least in Iran most recently where some bloodthirsty cleric is proclaiming that all rioters should be executed.

To re-cap, there can be few people in the world today, civilised or otherwise, who believe that the recent elections in Iran were fair and just. Of course, it is quite possible that both sides were trying to rig the ballot boxes, but there are just too many anomalies in the results to believe that the incumbent President won the election by anything like the claimed majority. He might have won, I cannot comment, but certainly not by the proclaimed majority.

The strength of negative feeling from the opposition within Iran, and from Iranians outside the country, is massive and powerful. They have been giving vent to their feelings, and show little appetite for remaining silent - almost at any cost. Which leads me to ponder on the words of the Islamic Cleric Ahmad Khatami, a known hardliner, who said "I want the judiciary to... punish leading rioters firmly and without showing any mercy to teach everyone a lesson," Khatami, a member of the Assembly of Experts, said the judiciary should charge the leading "rioters" as being "mohareb" or one who wages war against God. "They should be punished ruthlessly and savagely," he said. Under Iran’s Islamic law, punishment for people convicted as "mohareb" is execution.

One must assume that Khatami is equating rioting against a corrupt President Ahmadinejad as waging war against God; surely a dangerous and heretical supposition, but then perhaps he is becoming fearful of his own position and, like a cornered snake, is prepared to come out fighting.

The fact that inflammatory words can be as destructive as weapons is not in doubt. Comments such as these will lead Iran into a bloody domestic conflict that will end in tears. The fact that these words can can come from a man of religion is even more worrying. If religious leaders promote violence, from a religious base that is supposed to preach tolerance - and by religious base I mean all religions - what hope will there ever be for the people of this world to live a life where differences are respected, where freedoms become the right of everybody, and where the ambitions of dictators are not allowed to flourish. I hope that Iran does not descend into more bloodshed on account of the words of mass destruction uttered by its supposed men of peace. 

A Piece for Peace

With our daily diet of negative media I am not sure whether any of you have noticed that outside the global financial meltdown, (with associated recessions/depressions and unemployment), the distressing tales of infant deaths in the United Kingdom due it seems to appalling negligence by the Social Services and the continuing loss of life in war zones such as Iraq and Afghanistan, there is actually some potentially positive news out there.

The New York Times, for example, has been running a series of full page advertisements in the last week during the occasion of Saudi Arabian King Abdullah's visit to the United Nations General Assembly. The one I noticed was inserted by a group promoting an event known as a "Weekend of Twinning". Twinning by 50 Mosques and 50 Synagogues across the USA and Canada to be held later this month. The message being jointly presented by the "Weekend" is one of an effort to confront Islamophobia and anti-Semitism. 

It's a start but it needs to go much further, and I hope it will. The signs, at least to me, look positive.

It is a truism that both of the "conditions" or phobias, that is Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, exist in large measure in our world, the latter for many more years than the former. Thus a greater degree of understanding through education can surely only be good. But dealing with the phobias alone does not deal with the broader issues - and the next steps, which would lead to co-existence. A co-existence by mankind in general - where a Muslim arriving in any country is not immediately branded a potential terrorist, where a Jew is not seen as a member of a tightly knit almost secret society with excessive influence in the corridors of power, and an historical financier of wars for financial gain. 

That said let me be the first to acknowledge that I am venturing on to shaky ground here. I am an amateur observer of what are some deeply rooted issues. But I suspect even so, having lived a good number of years in the Middle East, and continuing as a regular visitor I have a better understanding of those issues than many who present their opinions as "experts". Nevertheless, I am receiving some clear pictures in my mind, and verbal messages in my ears that the senior leaders in the Middle East are beginning to stick their necks out and send ever clearer signals that the world must have peace in the region. Peace that must start first with an acknowledgement that terrorism, threats from nearby countries, and the general state of "alert" that prevents human beings from going about their daily lives without the threat of being blown up, is unacceptable. 

I am not so naive as to believe that this is easily achievable, although I do think that former President Clinton came close to reaching an agreement just before he stepped down from the Presidency. But any agreement is only possible if Middle Eastern leaders, from both sides, genuinely want there to be peace. Will an agreement stop the hostilities immediately? It is unlikely, but those same leaders can put pressure on the perpetrators if they have a will to do. And they are showing signs of doing so.

It may be somewhat ironic, but what sort of a positive message would it send around the world if we really achieve something positive around the same time as the Christian faith celebrates its religious holiday? And before the end of the Chinese New Year of the Rat - a year that the soothsayers predicted would be every bit as appalling as it has turned out to be - a peace that would have a very significant impact upon a world that is fearful, beaten and miserable.

It doesn't really matter what you believe in, does it? It would be seriously good news whenever it happens - and if the event in North America is a start, there could be a boost very soon. 

However we choose to place our wishes and thoughts, this the time we should all put our minds to doing our piece for peace.