Karole's space

Right of Reply: Peeling the myths off Saudi Arabia

In Isi Leibler's "Candidly Speaking" (July 29), we read the same myths regarding the kingdom of Saudi Arabia; sweeping statements are presented as immutable fact.

In 2005, one of my closest professional partners (as well as closest friends) and I planned for and created a model for a Saudi-sponsored interfaith dialogue to be ideally hosted by King Abdullah in Spain. We worked on the concept in Riyadh, where I live. (For the record, she is Jewish and visits the kingdom frequently.) We submitted the business plan to specific members of the royal family, and three years later the dialogue materialized almost exactly as we imagined. It may well be that our idea was coincidence and incidental to the king's own interfaith dialogue, as we were not part of further planning, but either way the desired outcome has been achieved.

We also, however, expected precisely the sort of media response printed - that in effect, any Jewish representative who participated on behalf of Judaism would, indeed, be placating the king or appeasing Saudi sensibilities. Any progress made in discussing globally relevant issues, specifically similarities and differences of religions, would be somehow offensive. Or, as written in The Jerusalem Post, they would be "grovelling" or "intoxicated."

Yet, if the king or any other Saudi official did not initiate this dialogue, no doubt it would be nanoseconds before it was written that the Saudis failed, once again, to make strides toward peace.

ONE CANNOT win for losing, but as the African proverb goes: "The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is now." King Abdullah, unlike counterparts in Israel, has planted that tree.

Leibler also repeats the oft-cited myth of "state sponsored export of Wahhabism" that has produced a network of sanctified violence. There is no such thing as "Wahhabism," just as there is no such thing as ""Maimonism." As you should know, madrassa is merely the Arabic word for school, madrassa al-din specifies a religious school, and there is no evidence yet to support any direct link between a madrassa and fighters in Afghanistan, Palestine or Iraq. In fact, there have been no convictions for terrorist activities in the United States of any Saudi, which would indicate that they have certainly had no success whatsoever for their supposed multi-billion dollar export of a radical doctrine. It certainly seems a poor cost-benefit analysis.

Additionally, the depictions of Jews are yet another story that won't die, and I have addressed the Saudi textbooks and education directly to the US Congress and do not need to repeat here, or specify Torah or Talmud chapter and verse for comparison. The depictions of Muslims and Arabs, specifically Saudis, however, remains abhorrent within Israel at times, just as in many parts of the world. The difference appears to be that Saudis have little ability to recruit the media to their cause, and have almost no ability to boast about their culture and their views to meet the rapidly changing news cycles. They thereby too often fail to quash these sweeping and persistent generalizations, despite all their excessive cash.

Also regurgitated is the notion that Jews are forbidden entry to Saudi Arabia. This is completely untrue, but these rumors have existed for decades, begun by US Aramco employees. Despite all corrections from the Saudis, they remain ignored. Clarifying that those with Israeli passports are not permitted entry into the kingdom (akin to no American being permitted to enter Cuba or Iran, for example), the policy rests on the political situation between the two nations. I feel safe in assuming that neither Fidel Castro nor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be invited to many Israeli-sponsored conferences either.

FINALLY, LET me address the state of Islam in Saudi Arabia.

It is correct to state that it is the official religion, but that is all it is. The confirmation is in the Constitution of Saudi Arabia. It states "Islam," not Sunni, not Sufi, not Shi'ite, not Ismaeli - just plain Islam, full stop. Indeed, would it not be foolish to ban Jews or Christians from the kingdom, given the assumption that the Saudis are spending vast quantities of petrodollars on exporting Islam? Are Jews not the very people whom they would wish to "convert"? Why, until relatively recent history and migration to Israel, were Jews living safely in Arabia, having existed there since the days of Abraham? Actually, why did the prophet marry a Jew, if not to show peace among religions?

It is understandable that some may choose words - sharper than swords - to block the path of peace and progress given the prism of Islam from within Israel. As occupiers of a predominantly Muslim land pre-1948, and as occupiers of the predominantly Muslim West Bank and Gaza, those fighting to preserve what is left of their land may "represent" to Israel all of Islam. Yet I suspect that the vast majority of Israeli Jews do not wish to be represented by the likes of the late Baruch Goldstein either, even though his slaughter of Muslims in 1993 was not in defense of his homeland and was instead an act of simple premeditated murder.

Leibler is perfectly correct in stating that the fear of offending the other party prevents true progress.

Indeed, a conference wherein Shas rabbis sat down with Hamas leaders and openly spoke their minds, now that would be progress.

The writer is a Saudi-US political analyst originally from London. She lives in Riyadh and London.

Candidly Speaking: Don't confuse interfaith dialogue with groveling

A global conference promoting interfaith dialogue sponsored by the current Saudi regime sounds somewhat like South African proponents of apartheid holding a global kumbaya extolling the virtues of racial equality.

That is not to deny that King Abdullah broke new ground by hosting an interfaith conference and for the first time inviting Jews to participate in a Saudi-sponsored event. Rabbi David Rosen, chairman of the International Jewish Committee on Interreligious Consultation, exuberantly described it as "an historic event" and a prelude "to the opening up of Saudi society," although he did caution that "time will tell if this is the beginning or just another event of no consequence."

Regrettably, being hosted by King Abdullah had such an intoxicating impact on some Jewish participants that they lost their bearings and indulged in excessive praise of their host that degenerated into groveling.

Rabbi Brad Hirschfeld, chairman of the National Center for Learning and Leadership, stressing that he was not naïve, claimed that immediately after he had blessed King Abdullah "with whom God shares divine glory," he saw the king's eyes fill with tears. Rabbi Michael Lerner, head of the radical Tikkun group, suggested that "for those of us who despair about Christianity and Judaism having gone astray... the notion that Islam might be the spark that generates a new religious revival based on mutual respect and spiritual intensity could dramatically expand our understanding of the endless potential for God to surprise us."

Walter Ruby, from the Foundation for Ethnic Understanding, compared King Abdullah's initiative to Mikhail Gorbachev's perestroika, forgetting that the Soviet reformer initiated dramatic reforms within his country, whereas Saudi Arabia still represents the most extreme example of fanatical Wahhabi style Islamic extremism.

In fact, state sponsored export of Wahhabism has produced a global network of jihadist Islamic schools and institutions which sanctify violence. This has led to the creation of centers throughout the world nurturing terrorist cadres and incubating many of the suicide bombers who are at the forefront of terrorist activities.

Saudi Arabia denies entry to Jews and prohibits all religions other than Islam the right to establish houses of worship. Saudi imams openly promote virulent anti-Semitism, depicting Jews in mosques and on TV as descendents of apes and pigs who should be killed. To this day, the Saudi educational system continues to incorporate obscenely anti-Semitic texts.

CLEARLY, KING Abdullah in his old age did not become transformed overnight into a liberal. But he is astute enough to realize that his country is under great threat from the expanding Iranian dominated Shi'ite crescent and is desperately seeking to bolster the regime's poor standing in the United States and Europe. That was the prime objective of Abdullah's interfaith conference.

Not surprisingly, the conference took place in Madrid rather than Jedda or Mecca.

Initially, "Rabbi" Yisroel Dovid Weiss, the New York Natorei Karta crackpot who had previously attended the Iranian Holocaust denial conference, was designated to be the only Jew to speak from the podium. After protests supported by an American Muslim imam engaged in interfaith activity, the Saudis backed down and disinvited Weiss. He was substituted by US interfaith guru Rabbi Arthur Schneier, who had hosted Pope Benedict XVI at his Park Avenue synagogue during his recent visit New York.

No Israeli rabbis were invited. Rabbi David Rosen, being Israeli with dual nationality, was designated as an American. In fact, aside from a brief exchange, Israel was kept off the agenda.

More importantly, whereas King Abdullah extolled the virtues of peace and condemned terrorism, participants were informed that only at a subsequent conference would "terrorism" be defined. Hitherto Moslems have denied that attacks against Israel were acts of terror, describing them as legitimate resistance.

IT IS inexplicable why Jewish participants lacked the courage to raise the crucial issues that would not resonate with their hosts. How could Jewish leaders participate in such an event without even relating to the obscene, state-sanctioned religious anti-Semitic incitement openly promoted by the country sponsoring the event? How could they remain silent when a Saudi deputy minister of culture stated that "Islam is a moderate culture and we are determined to prevent extremists from hijacking Islam"? Surely they had an obligation to point out that while all three major monotheistic religions incorporate elements of militant piety and violence, Islam, with its dominant jihadist branches, today represents the most violent doctrine. To remain silent on these issues enabled the Saudis to exploit interfaith dialogue as a vehicle to obtain respectability and cover up their extremism.

Jewish representatives also failed to protest when the concluding communiqué of the conference called "for international organizations to work to issue a document stating respect of faiths and religious symbols and criminalizing those insulting them." This seemingly innocuous statement embodies a call to legally sanction Islamic bullying against all who criticize or question Islamic beliefs or behavior as exemplified by the violence and vicious campaign in relation to Danish cartoons of the prophet Muhammad. Jews who are sensitive to the demonization of religious practice must nevertheless strongly oppose this.

Failure to oppose such initiatives parallels liberal American Jewish leaders endorsing Muslim demands to outlaw security profiling, despite the fact that 95 percent of acts of global terrorism emanate from that group.

WE ALSO do ourselves a great disservice if we endorse the false allegation that Islamaphobia is rampant. It is in fact a tribute to tolerance in Western countries that despite the violence and intimidation emanating from Muslims, overt aggression or discrimination against them has been extremely limited. Indeed, unlike synagogues, mosques rarely require armed guards, and in Europe, much of the violence directed against Jews actually emanates from Muslims.

We must also demand reciprocity. Tolerance and rights for Muslims in Western countries must be matched by tolerance to non-Muslims in Islamic states.

None of this detracts from our obligation to raise our voices against those who would condemn an entire religion because of the criminal behavior of individuals. Yet it is galling that in the Muslim arena there are virtually no such condemnations in relation to incitement against Israel, Jews, or even the US.

Bottom line: Dialogue with the Catholic Church only succeeded because of openness and a will to proceed by both parties. Reputable Jewish organizations must recognize that dialogue with Muslims becomes counterproductive when they fail to present the Jewish case for fear of offending the other party or demean themselves by groveling to appease or curry favor with their hosts. All that is achieved is a façade of goodwill which ultimately only strengthens extremists at the expense of the few genuine moderates within the Islamic community.

It was particularly scandalous and shameful that at a conference presided over by Saudi Arabians who babbled on about tolerance and goodwill, the Jewish participants did not insist on raising the issue of state-sponsored clerical anti-Semitism which is endemic in the country which hosted them.

ileibler@netvision.net.il