It is a story about a Jewish woman, Arna Mer-Khamis, who created a children’s home and art center in the Palestinian refugee camp of Jenin.

Even in her advanced age, Arna was a firebrand who railed against the occupation by Israelis.

Watch the trailer here

Her son, Juliano Mer Khamis, who also helped direct a theater group for children created by his mother, directed the film.

What was unique about Arna was that she engaged the children through art and theater. She encouraged them to own their feelings of anger, fear, and desperation and express them in some way.

Even at a young age the children were suspicious of Arna and Juliano because they are Jews. It takes some time for them to accept them as people who want to help them.

What is hardest to watch is the juxtaposition of clips of the Palestinian children as kids who joke around and play to those of them as adults. One of the children, while an adult, videotapes a message to his family before he commits a suicide attack.

What is plain to see in the parts showing the children as adults is how they have become steeled in their opposition to the Israeli occupation. Long gone is the time when they would laugh and smile for the camera.

While Israelis are barely shown in the film (except for at some checkpoints or in tanks), the fact that Arna and her son give a voice to the oppressed is proof individuals can make a great difference even in the most difficult of circumstances.

Murphy can be reached at: Lojano@comcast.net

Protesters gather in Tahrir Square for a 'Day of Departure' rally aimed at ousting Egyptian President Mubarak

Advancements in communication technology have often foreshadowed civil unrest and revolution

Advancements in communication technology have often foreshadowed civil unrest and revolution

• By Dan Rowinski
• Feb 04, 2011

Last October, New Yorker writer Malcolm Gladwell wrote an article, “Small Change,” that was subtitled “Why the revolution won’t be tweeted.”

The main thrust of Gladwell’s piece, citing historical examples of social activism that did not use social media, was that services such as Twitter and Facebook foster “soft ties” between people. People may comment on a subject – saving baby seals, for example – but not actually do anything about it. Gladwell argued that social networking was not an effective way for people to create “strong ties” that would get something accomplished, as sit-in protests did during the 1960s.

But recent events in Tunisia, Egypt and other spots in the Middle East could indicate otherwise. Social media tools, and the Internet itself, have played significant roles.

Tunisia, where protests started in December, in many ways served as the precursor to what has been happening in Egypt. When people needed to communicate to organize demonstrations that ultimately led to fall of the regime, they went to Facebook as a primary news source. Facebook served as a place for people to tell each other where they would be, whether that was fleeing from the anarchy or rushing into it, or keeping track of changes from thousands of miles away.

The Tunisian government under Zine El Abidine Ben Ali saw the power that Facebook had in helping citizens against the government and had its Internet censorship group, nicknamed Ammar by Tunisians, write a script that allegedly stole the login information for Facebook users in the country.

Alexis Madrigal of The Atlantic wrote “The Inside Story of How Facebook Responded to Tunisian Hacks” outlining how Ammar stole Facebook login information and how the company went about fixing the security problem that allowed the government to do it. The article also describes what an important tool Facebook became for Tunisians.

“All kinds of information passed between Tunisians,” Madrigal writes. “For activists as well as everyday people, Facebook became an indispensable resource for tracking the minute-by-minute development of the situation.”

The overthrow of Ben Ali was completed Jan. 14, when he stepped down and flew to exile in Saudi Arabia. But Tunisia appeared to be just the beginning.

Egypt is in chaos. There is a strong movement by the people of the country to force president Hosni Mubarak, in power the last 30 years, to step down, and within the past couple of days violence has picked up in Cairo as tensions mount. As of this writing, Mubarak has said he will not run for re-election but is refusing calls to resign immediately.

Throughout history, a great engine of change has been the pace and availability information. Gutenberg’s printing press is the modern precursor. Facebook, in a convoluted way, and to a lesser extent Twitter, is a descendant of that legacy.

But the journey that has eventually led to this current turmoil in the Middle East (Yemen, Sudan and Jordan, among other countries, are now seeing heavy protests) can be traced to the 1980s.

Ben Ali and Mubarak came to power in that decade — in 1987 and 1981, respectively. Personal computers, more or less starting with Apple’s Lisa, Apple II and Macintosh projects, were just starting to ascend. In many ways, the rise of the personal computer and the change in communication that it led to has coincided with the fall of Ben Ali and Mubarak.

“The most compelling reason for most people to buy a computer for the home will be to link it into a nationwide communications network,” Apple CEO Steve Jobs said in an interview with Playboy in 1985. “Weʼre just in the beginning stages of what will be a truly remarkable breakthrough for most people — as remarkable as the telephone.”

Jobs has proved to be a visionary. His work on the personal computer and later on the advance of the smart phone (the first iPhone was released in July 2007) has been instrumental in changing how people communicate, and thus the pace and quantity of dissemination of information.

Gladwell might be correct that Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen and Sudan may very well have undergone revolutions without the Internet, Twitter and Facebook. But would those events all have happened within weeks of each other?

In his most recent NewsDesk blog post at the New Yorker, Gladwell states his case:

“People protested and brought down governments before Facebook was invented. They did it before the Internet came along,” Gladwell writes. “Barely anyone in East Germany in the 1980s had a phone — and they ended up with hundreds of thousands of people in central Leipzig and brought down a regime that we all thought would last another hundred years — and in the French Revolution the crowd in the streets spoke to one another with that strange, today largely unknown instrument known as the human voice. People with a grievance will always find ways to communicate with each other.”

True enough, but he may be overlooking a key piece of each particular era of important civil strife – new means of communication. The American Revolution was spurred along by a newly popular form of newsletter – pamphlets, such as Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense.” Pamphlets and broadsides were also important in the French Revolution, as was a new trend that had been growing in France during the 18th century, that of the salon. Although it wasn’t a technological innovation, was a newer manner of bringing people together for the purpose of communication, not unlike a chat room or Facebook page.

The East Germans may not have had telephones, but they did have televisions and radios that were providing new outlets for information dissemination in the 1980s.

In each case, information that reached an otherwise uniformed people helped lead to a change in the way of life, and eventually in the regime they lived under.

The timeline of computer and Internet communication brings us to Egypt, today. The technology spread from the United States and has only recently become ubiquitous in places in the Middle East within the last five to 10 years. The free access Americans and Europeans enjoyed was slower to reach places with de facto dictatorships. But no matter how much Ben Ali or Mubarak wanted to keep people from accessing information, eventually there was really no way for them to stop it.

Not that that stopped Mubarak’s administration from trying.

The government of Egypt, in an unprecedented move, completely shut down Internet and cellular service in Egypt. It is now back up, sporadically. The government forced its telecommunications companies to cease all routing into or out of the country, in part to keep people from communicating through blogs, e-mail, Facebook and Twitter, all of which had become important amplifiers and modes of organization for protesters.

Egypt even used the telecomm companies to forcibly spread information on behalf of the government, as cellular provider Vodafone revealed Feb. 3.

China, which has the tightest control over what its citizens can or cannot read, watch or write about in the world, has made attempts to restrict what people can see coming out of Egypt and has blocked searches for “Egypt,” according to the New York Times. It is in China’s best interest to control this dissemination of information, lest its large populace start getting the same types of ideas as have been spreading around the Middle East.

“The revolution will not be tweeted,” Gladwell wrote. Yet, if we can call what is happening in Egypt, or what happened in Tunisia, a revolution, it is being tweeted. Even when the Internet in the country went down, the tweets still kept coming, either from journalists who would relay to their headquarters or other ways, such as Google, Twitter and SayNow (owned by Google) providing a phone number where people in Egypt could call and leave a tweet via voice mail, which would be transcribed and sent out with the hashtag #Egypt. Information is getting out, which means that, in one form or another, information is getting in.

There is no way to tell if these civic eruptions would have happened if the Internet had not become such a ubiquitous entity. But Internet communications and social media have contributed to communications and creating the strong ties that have bound the people of various nations together to question their authorities and act.

With new technology and new ways of communication, times change.

Just look at Egypt.

Source: http://gcn.com/Articles/2011/02/04/Egypt-Social-media-evolution-and-revolution.aspx?Page=4

According to Sysomos, the number of tweets that contained the words “Egypt,” “Yemen,” or “Tunisia” increased more than tenfold after January 23rd: there were 122,319 tweets between January 16 and 23 containing these terms, and 1.3 million tweets between January 24 and January 30.

Sysomos also analyzed the location of those tweeting about Egypt and found that a minority were from Egypt, Yemen, or Tunisia. The company writes, “We analyzed 52 million Twitter users, and discovered that only 14,642, or 0.027%, identified themselves as being from Egypt, Yemen and Tunisia. Of these people, 88.1% were from Egypt, 9.5% from Tunisia and 2.13% from Yemen. It is important to note this number probably doesn’t reflect the number of Twitter users since many users in Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen likely do not provide their location information to protect their identities.”

“#Jan25,” a Twitter hashtag that debuted when the protests began, remains the most common hashtag used to discuss the unrest in Egypt.

While Facebook and Twitter have been heavily relied upon to share information about the situation in Egypt, users have also turned to more unlikely social networks to express their support for the protesters. For example, on Polyvore, a fashion website, users from Tunisia, the U.S. and other nations posted images with captions such as “My Heart is with Egypt today,” or “Egypt now cut off from Internet plz help spread their cause.” Those with access to Twitter have used the social network to search for missing colleagues, like Google executive Wael Ghonim, who disappeared after arriving in Cairo.

Forced to do without Internet access, Egyptians are using low-tech technologies to communicate with each other and people abroad. Fax machines, ham radios, and dial-up Internet connections have all been used in place of high-speed networks.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/31/twitter-egypt-protests_n_816542.html

The External Communications Agency will be replaced by an independent body that will help coordinate with foreign media but will not interfere in their output, Regional Development Minister Nejib Chebbi told Tunisian state television.

The move is part of the interim government’s efforts to roll back the restrictive policies of Ben Ali, who strictly controlled the media during his 23-year rule.

Ben Ali fled the country on Jan. 14 after weeks of protests. The interim government that has taken charge has since freed political prisoners, pledged to hold free elections, and promised to allow free media and free debate. (Reporting by Tarek Amara, Writing by Lin Noueihed; Editing by Maria Golovnina)

Source: http://af.reuters.com/article/tunisiaNews/idAFLDE70P2GP20110126

Many sites registered in Egypt could not be reached from outside, according to Herdict.org, a website where users report access problems.

Twitter, YouTube, Hotmail, Google, Chinese search engine Baidu and a “proxy service” – which would allow users to evade obvious restrictions – appeared to be blocked from inside the country, according to reports on the site.

Twitter said blocking was intermittent and some users were able to tweet while Bambuser, a Swedish site for streaming video from mobile phones, said it had been blocked after being used by some protesters this week.

About 24%, or 19.2 million, of Egypt’s 80 million population have internet access, usually through internet cafes, mobile internet or “public information technology clubs”. About 1m have home access via computer.

Far more people – about 26 million – have mobile phones, so protests could be organised via text message. Vodafone, one of the two largest mobile phone operators there, said it was not responsible for blocking Twitter. “It’s a problem all over Egypt and we are waiting for a solution.”

Other reports say the government has disabled mobile phone towers and the telephone service, and that all communications have been disrupted. This could not be confirmed.

The government could order internet service providers to filter out services or block sites, but usually cracks down on writers and bloggers. In 2009 the Committee to Protect Journalists listed Egypt as one of the 10 worst countries for bloggers because of the tendency to arrest critics.

The government might have ordered the military to commandeer communications centres, leading to the blocking.

But any piecemeal attempt to identify sites being used to organise protests or beam video to the outside world will inevitably lead to a cat and mouse game between the authorities and protesters, who will be able to stay one step ahead.

Meanwhile, Egyptian government websites were targeted in return by Anonymous, the group of hackers who take on opponents they see as unpopular or oppressive. Reports suggested that a number of official sites had been hacked or put offline.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/26/egypt-blocks-social-media-websites

November 10, 2010, 12:00pm – 1:30pm

Admission is free.

RSVP to attend this event

Panelists:

Steven A. Cook, Hasib J. Sabbagh Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations

Soner Cagaptay, Director of the Turkish Research Program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy

Michael Werz, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress

Moderated by:

Brian Katulis, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress

Long an important U.S. ally, and located at a key geographic and economic juncture between Europe and the Middle East, recent changes in Turkey and positions taken by Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan have raised a number of questions about Turkey’s role in the region and the nature of the future U.S.-Turkey relationship. Is Turkey’s newly assertive posture the result of democratic changes and adoption of vigorous free-market principles? Has Turkey chosen to align itself with the “East” over the “West,” as some have suggested? What are the implications of Turkey’s impressive economic growth, both for Turkey’s domestic politics and for its foreign policy?

Please join the Center for American Progress for a discussion of these questions.

November 10, 2010, 12:00pm – 1:30pm

Space is extremely limited. RSVP required.

Seating is on a first-come, first-served basis and not guaranteed.

Lunch will be served at 11:30 a.m.

Center for American Progress

1333 H St. NW, 10th Floor

Washington, DC 20005

Map & Directions

Nearest Metro:

Blue/Orange Line to McPherson Square or Red Line to Metro Center

RSVP to attend this event

For more information, call 202-682-1611.

###

The Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational institute dedicated to promoting a strong, just and free America that ensures opportunity for all. We believe that Americans are bound together by a common commitment to these values and we aspire to ensure that our national policies reflect these values. We work to find progressive and pragmatic solutions to significant domestic and international problems and develop policy proposals that foster a government that is “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

This article “brilliantly illuminates the on-the-ground experiences of women who are driving change.”

———————–

Female Journalists Urged To Form Strong Network

Source: The News. Islamabad, Pakistan. In English.  22 Oct 2010.

Isobel Coleman, a senior fellow for the US Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, has urged female journalists to build a strong network that would not only act as a pressure group, but also press the stakeholders to address their demands.

During an interactive session with female journalists here on Tuesday, Coleman shared her experience of working in Middle East and South Asia, particularly with reference to working on the state of female journalists in these regions. She commended the efforts of female journalists, who were striving to bring about a change in society despite working under tough conditions. “I really appreciate Pakistani journalists, who despite many cultural and religious restrictions, are real agents of change and should be facilitated in every possible way,” she said.

She said in Pakistan the media is free, but not fair and reliable. Female journalists should also be given equal rights like their male colleagues and facilitated, as women journalists can report issues with more sensitivity and care and bring a change in society.

Coleman quoted various examples from Saudi Arabia, Iran and Afghanistan where the circumstances for female journalists were even tougher. “In Saudi Arabia, female journalists have to sit in a separate room, but they are provided with transport facility since they are not allowed to drive,” she said.

She, on the other hand, quoted the example of Afghanistan where journalism is one of the most dangerous professions and the rate of assassination of journalists was higher than any other part of the world.
Coleman believed that the way a female journalist could highlight social issues could not be highlighted by their male counterparts. “Due to the culture of the countries like Pakistan, women particularly feel more comfortable while sharing their miseries with a female journalist rather than a male journalist,” she said.
The area of expertise of Coleman includes democratisation, civil society and economic development, regional gender issues, educational reforms and micro-finance. She is the author and co-author of various publications, including ‘Paradise Beneath her Feet: How Women are Transforming the Middle East’, ‘Restoring the Balance: A Middle East Strategy for the next President’ and ‘Strategic Foreign Assistance: Civil Society in International Security’. In her books, Coleman has highlighted a number of Muslim men and women, who are among the most influential Islamic feminist thinkers, and brilliantly illuminates the on-the-ground experiences of women who are driving change.

http://twitter.com/middleeastmedia#

5.  Twitter: Mobile phone-carrying Iraqis can utilize Twitter applications on their current phones for a range of things, even without broadband Internet connections — which are still in short supply in Iraq. In a 2009 CNN American Morning interview, Jack Dorsey (co-founder of Twitter) gave an interview stating that he hopes Twitter can help make the new Iraqi government more accessible and help spread good news from Iraq out to the rest of the world.

4. WordPress: Many blogs provide commentary or news on a particular subject; others function as more personal online diaries.  WordPress, a blog-hosting site, seeks to teach Iraqis of all ages how to share their story with the world.  This type of blogging, known as citizen journalism, can lead some Iraqis to also formulate an interest in professional journalism. Young Iraqis, in particular, may decide to work alongside foreign reporters as translators and journalism apprentices. This way, such tactics as how to pose questions, how to fact check, and how to report accurate information can be learned from the ground-up.

3. Meetup: Meetup is an online tool that can be used to organize offline meetings or gatherings. The company boasts over 7 million users, 2.2 monthly RSVPs for meetings, and 250,000 monthly meetups. If you are looking for a way to organize your existing supporters offline or are looking to find people who share similar interests to you, Meetup is a great resource.  The CEO’s of Meetup hope this site can facilitate progressive social, political, and economic meetings between those in Iraq who would otherwise be unlikely to cross paths.

2. YouTube: Similar to how online video has transformed how soldiers and politicians visually share experiences, Iraqi civilians and newly trained troops have the capability to film digital images that can easily be edited and uploaded from laptop computers.  These types of videos offer a raw, first-hand view of daily life.  By allowing Iraqis to better utilize YouTube, it can allow the rest of the world to know what life in the region is actually like.  By allowing Iraqis to share their experiences (while taking into account national security), it can make them feel connected to the rest of the world and like what they’re doing has a purpose.  Often the most moving videos posted by users move ‘virally’, moving quickly and to a large number of viewers.

1. Howcast: Howcast empowers people with engaging, useful how-to information wherever, whenever they need to know how. Known for high-quality content, Howcast streams tens of millions of videos every month across its multi-platform distribution network. Approaching two million downloads across iPhone, iPad, Android, and BlackBerry phones, Howcast is the #1 mobile app for instructional content.  This technology can be an incredible tool when it comes to instituting wide-spread, accessible public education for Iraqis of all ages, male or female, injured or well.

The U.S. Department of State is hoping that by bringing new media technology to Iraq that they will provide conceptual input as well as ideas on how new technologies can be used to build local capacity, foster greater transparency and accountability, build upon anti-corruption efforts, promote critical thinking in the classroom, scale-up civil society, and further empower local entities and individuals by providing the tools for network building.

In light of Egypt’s upcoming November parliamentary elections, Egyptian officials have imposed new media restrictions that will effectively put all live broadcasts, including independent television talk shows and news bulletins, under the control of state television. Additionally, state regulators set new rules for companies that send out text message news alerts to mobile phones. Activists say the restrictions will stifle efforts to mobilize voters for November’s parliamentary elections… particularly the efforts of Egyptian youth who have become accustomed to using mobile new media technology (SMS, Facebook, Twitter, etc).

Egyptian Youth Are The Winds of Change

The  resurgent political role of youth directly intertwines with each Egyptian election cycle.  In 2006, Egyptian youth held demonstrations that accompanied judges’ protests. Judges, who had exposed instances of election fraud during the 2005 parliamentary elections, were referred to a disciplinary committee by the High Council of the Judiciary. In response, the Judges Club of Egypt held a sit-in, and various parties and movements staged demonstrations in solidarity with the judges’ sit-in. Youth from movements such as Kifaya and the Muslim Brotherhood were highly visible during these protests. The regime reacted strongly to such activism. Hundreds of activists from the Brotherhood and from Kifaya were arrested and detained for several months.

Another manifestation of youth activism during that period was the emergence of a small but outspoken bloggers movement in Egypt. According to a recent report issued by the Egyptian Cabinet Information and Decision Support Center, by April 2008 there were approximately 160,000 blogs in Egypt. And while only 20% of these blogs were political in nature, they succeeded nonetheless in causing a stir and in attracting popular and official attention.

What’s The Big Deal, You Ask?

Egypt has a large young population that is suffering from various forms of exclusion and a decaying political system that is increasingly unable to meet the demands of this population.  El-Gweini (adviser to Egypt’s Telecommunications Minister) said the recent media restriction decision was not supposed to curb political activity, but rather to protect people from “random” text messages about sensitive issues.  ”We are not making life difficult. We are making life organised, that is all.”

However, most instances of youth activism occurred largely outside pre-existing political structures and both the ruling party and opposition parties and movements failed to appeal to youth who preferred to join some of the newer parties and movements. The regime, with the tacit support of some of the older parties and movements, has successfully eliminated these newer groups and has thus left youth with no one to lead them or represent them. Kifaya is now largely defunct and Ayman Nour the leader of Al Ghad party is serving a five year prison sentence.

The Future: Unnecessary Radicalization

The continued exclusion of Egyptian youth, coupled with the insistence of the regime to bloc all avenues of youth participation, threatens to radicalize youth activism. Thus far, youth activism has been moderate and reformist in tone and has relied exclusively on non-violent tactics. However, continued exclusion might lead to the emergence of more radical and militant groups among youth. The challenge during the coming period for both the ruling party, and for opposition parties and movements is to make room for the emergence of new groups that are better able to represent youth and to articulate their needs. Absent such a development, youth in Egypt, as in much of the Arab world, will remain a ticking time bomb.

[Some information in this story was provided by Al-Masry Al-Youm, Al-Jazeera, AP, ArabReform.net, and Chosun Ilbo.]

I came across was an article featured on Naharnet.com, a Lebanese-based news site.  The September 24, 2010 article titled, “Moussawi Warns: Those Who Endorse STL Indictment Mustn’t Be Only Worried, But Also Panic-Stricken” noted that Hizbullah’s MP Nawwaf Moussawi warned that “the period that will follow the (Special Tribunal for Lebanon) indictment won’t be the same as the one before, and any group in Lebanon that might endorse this indictment will be treated as one of the tools of the U.S.-Israeli invasion, and it will have the same fate as the invader.”

What is this referring to, you ask?  Hezbollah, taking a page out of a Mafia playbook, is telling all of Lebanon that anyone who supports the findings of the United Nation’s Special Tribunal for Lebanon on who was behind the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri (and 22 others in 2005) will be, in essence, treated as a Zionist enemy and killed.  This means that Hezbollah does NOT want any of its own members accused of the crime.  If they are, civil war may ensue.

Hezbollah leader Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah has presented evidence to the tribunal attempting to prove that Israel masterminded the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.  However, Syria was also accused of being behind the plot to assassinate Hariri, which undermined ties between Damascus and Beirut and eventually led to the withdrawl of Syrian troops from Lebanon in 2005 to (what some speculate) was an effort to get rid of the leader (Hariri) who wanted to weaken Syria’s domination in Lebanon.

The Hezbollah leader said that Ahmed Nasrallah had the assassination was meant to spark a sectarian and religious war in Lebanon, adding that if the UN tribual investigating the case fails to consider the new evidence against Israel, that decision will show that the investigation has been politicized and swayed (Source: www.globalresearch.ca).

Yet, this 5-year-old murder case has stoked a dangerous Lebanon crisis.  On September 27, 2010, Associated Press published an article discussing how the quest to uncover and prosecute Hariri’s killers threatens to tear the country apart.  The possibility that the UN tribunal investigating the murder could indict members of the Shiite militant group Hezbollah — perhaps as soon as next month — is fueling Lebanon’s worst political crisis in years.

Hezbollah’s leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah has openly stated that he expects some members of his political party will be indicted, but he vows not to hand them over to be prosecuted.  Pro-Syrian Christian politician Suleiman Franjieh recently stated in a television interview on September 23 that if Hezbollah members are indicted “there will be war in Lebanon.”

Residents carry their belongings through a flooded road in Risalpur, located in Nowshera District, in Pakistan's Northwest Frontier Province July 30, 2010.

After weeks of criticizing government flood relief efforts, some Pakistani media have begun to cautiously praise Islamabad’s response while warning that if the public’s “urgent” needs are not met, Pakistan will become a “failed state.”  English- and Urdu-language media continue to carry varying amounts of praise for U.S. flood relief efforts.  Some media have reported allegations that floodwaters were diverted to protect a “U.S. airbase” at Jacobabad.

Pakistani, state-run PTV is also playing up government relief efforts like reconstruction of roads and visits by government-sponsored teams to relief camps. State news agency APP said PTV has also set up “talk shows, fundraising campaigns, and special public service messages” to facilitate relief efforts (APP, 18 August).  Some English- and Urdu-language media seem to be shifting from their earlier, broad-scale attacks on government relief efforts while warning that if “urgent” public needs are not met, Pakistan will become a “failed state” leading to “bloodshed” (Geo News TV, 18 August).

State media continue to report and comment positively on U.S. aid as do some private media.  APP reported U.S. Senator Kerry’s pledge to increase US aid to $150 million, and Geo News TV cited U.S. Ambassador Patterson as outlining U.S. aid (19, 17 August).

Popular Geo News TV host Kamran Khan said that “Saudi Arabia and the United States” are “great friends of Pakistan,” as they are providing aid “magnanimously,” and he also cited the details of U.S. relief efforts listed by Ambassador Patterson and her statement that the United States is “standing alongside Pakistan in this moment of crisis” (17 August).  Prior to Secretary Clinton’s 19 August announcement of additional U.S. aid, Jang reported that among the countries which have provided aid for the flood-affected, “Saudi Arabia stands at number one while the United States stands at number two” (19 August).  Even anti-US outlets have — on occasion — carried positive reports on US aid efforts.  For example, The Nation quoted U.S. Marine Corps Commander General Conway as expressing “full support” to Pakistan and as saying the United States “will continue to provide timely funds” for flood victims (19 August).  Azadi, which gives extensive coverage to Taliban activities, acknowledged that the United States has sent “18 US Marine helicopters” into Swat for rescue operations, which has “given hope” to the people (19 August).

Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant

This week, Iran will officially have a fully functional nuclear power plant (with the help of Russia) in Bushehr (a city on the southwestern coast of Iran) that will connect to the country’s grid by November at the latest.  There have been mixed international reactions since nuclear engineers began to fuel the power station.

Last week, John Bolton (former US Ambassador to the UN), provided fellow “war drummers” with something to think about.  On Tuesday, Aug 17, 2010, France’s independent AFP ran an attention-grabbing article stating “Israel has ’8 days’ to hit Iran nuclear site“.  Bolton stressed that Israel has “eight days” to launch a military strike against Iran’s Bushehr nuclear facility and stop Tehran from acquiring a functioning atomic plant.  He goes on to guilt naysayers who want to stay away from any form of military conflict between Israel and Iran by stating, “I’m afraid that they’ve lost this opportunity.”

For those of you who have not followed Bolton’s career… I will put it frankly: he has always been a man who has been for military activity.  It is a matter of fact that if Israel and Iran were to ever get into any type of conflict, it would not be a standard war that you so often hear could happen.  It would be a long drawn out insurgency using Hezbollah in Lebanon and a number of terrorist activities.  Iran does not want to invade Israel and Israel does not want to occupy Iranian territory.  If Israel were to seriously strike Iran, Iran would perhaps simply channel money toward a huge number of global terrorist attacks on Israelis and Israeli allies.  Taking this into consideration, the United States and its officials should not advocate a “General Patton view” on things.

Interestingly, some Middle East media outlets have focused on other issues.  ”(Iran doesn’t) have the enrichment capacity, they don’t have the uranium capacity, they don’t have the ability to continually fuel Bushehr,” Paul Brannan, senior research analyst at the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), told Al Jazeera.  ”Iran says facilities like Natanz and Qom are necessary to supply its nascent nuclear power system, but they produce so little enriched uranium that they would not be able to fuel the Bushehr reactor.  Instead of fretting over Bushehr, the international community should be concerned with Iran’s secretive work on other sites.  More concerning is the project currently under way near the town of Arakin western Iran, where the government appears to be constructing a heavy-water reactor. Unlike Bushehr, a light-water reactor, the power plant at Arak could produce a byproduct more easily reprocessed into weapons-grade plutonium. A facility to produce heavy water has already been constructed in Iran, while the government has given variable dates over the next four years for the Arak reactor to open.  [Arak is] actually the reactor I would worry more about,” he said.

Brannan may be onto something.  On Saturday, Aug 21, 2010, Lebanon’s Daily Star re-published a neutral Reuters article stating that Tehran would stop high-grade enrichment if it was assured of nuclear fuel supplies for a research reactor.

The same day, the Editor in Chief of The Daily Star wrote a strongly worded and timely editorial titled ’With lives at stake, diplomacy is key‘.  The Editor in Chief, Jamil Mroue, stated, “At this point, however, we find it deeply disturbing how the various pundits, think-tankers and officials are discussing the potential scenarios.  …  The debate reminds us of men in smoking rooms, playing at parlor games – or perhaps of a purely academic model of a conflict, where backlash is calculated according to an algorithm. This region’s inhabitants are pieces on a board, not to be grieved over if lost during the match. The most reprehensible arguments simply resign in the face of the Islamic Republic, as hawks claim they – and no one – can understand this fanatical regime, so why bother trying? To be sure, the clerical regime in Tehran also for the most part regards its populace as pawns in its power machinations. But, as people living in this region, we feel like little more than targets on a wall. In the end, the inescapable conclusion is that individuals are bantering about the potential conflict and its “repercussions” without at all grasping that the lives of half-a-billion people could be plunged into chaos. It seems as though we have entered a year where genuine negotiations could be pursued; considering the level of debate about the alternative, we deeply encourage all sides to make diplomacy a success.”

Lebanon has a lot at stake.  For the Editor in Chief of Lebanon’s most prominent newspaper to write such an editorial, we must be in an infallibly crucial period of time.

It was suggested that this sort of data could contain valuable information for advertisers who want to reach the largest possible number of people.  However, thinking about this from a U.S. foreign policy perspective, I see this as an incredible opportunity to re-shape public diplomacy outreach.  What better a way to bridge the culture gap and extend a more positive view of American society and culture?  The U.S. should move toward more joint social media ventures with Middle East NGOs, regional religious organizations, and local women’s groups by creating Facebook groups, Meetup.org groups, etc.

Although I’ve always had great interest in the value of this type of outreach, the unwavering necessity for this was cemented in my mind after being privy to briefly meeting and then hearing Karen Hughes (“the most powerful woman ever to serve in the White House”) speak at a conference on strategic communication in Washington DC.  She emphasized the need for more intercultural citizen dialogue through new and innovative means.  These partnerships through social media dialogue can not only isolate extremism, but can offer a vision of hope for a more fair depiction of both American and Middle Eastern online societies.