Mutual accusations between Egypt and Israel
EGYPT
Al Ahram (Cairo) on Egyptian-Israeli relations: Mutual accusations between Egypt and Israel concerning the monitoring of Egyptian-Israeli borders have become common. The Zionist Lobby in Washington continues to point the finger at Egypt in what seems to be a breach of the spirit of the Camp David Accords.
Some argue that strains in Egyptian-Israeli relations are due to unusual circumstances — the rise of Israeli hawks or the growing influence of nationalist and religious hardliners on the Arab street. This is an oversimplification which ignores a host of regional and international considerations as well as the long-term rivalries.
Countries that might hope to play a major role in the region include Turkey and Iran. History, geography and religious sympathies make that a possibility. But the chances of an Arab country leading the region remain far more plausible. In this region it helps if you are Arab as well as Muslim. Israel has no chance.
Deep down the Israelis know this. Most are not from the region and have no desire to belong to it.
Israel has been telling the Bush administration that Egypt is not policing the borders with Israel adequately. Is this how the Israelis hope to assert their regional power? Egypt’s regional status is home-grown, not imported from abroad. Egypt’s strength is in its Arab bonds, an integral part of Egyptian nationalism. We can, for example, revive the Egyptian-Saudi-Syrian axis, work hard to make the next Arab summit a success, turn the Arab free trade zone into a customs union, and push national reconciliation in Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon.
The more Cairo succeeds in such endeavours the more it will be able to “normalise” ties with Israel which — to put things bluntly — means keeping Israeli expansion at bay.
GREAT BRITAIN
The (London) Observer, on free cultural events for the public: If our opera houses, theatres and concert halls follow the excellent advice of Sir Brian McMaster’s arts report and throw open their doors for a week each year for free, some grand spaces will be among the publicly funded institutions welcoming new punters into their gilded foyers. Cultural impresarios have expressed delight at Sir Brian’s plan to bring thousands of newcomers into contact with ballet, drama and orchestral music for the first time, and we join them, while sympathising over profit margins if the idea takes off. There is comfort at hand, though, for hard-pressed companies. For those fortunate audiences who have saved on the admission price on Wagner or Stravinsky are surely going to spend more at the bar that night. Trebles all round!
ITALY
La Repubblica (Rome), on the cancellation of Pope Benedict XVI’s visit to a Rome university: Once the invitation had been sent, and accepted, the meeting was bound to take place. For the students, it would have been a chance to listen directly to the words of a pope who has spent many years in universities, and who remains a professor even if he is the pope. The professors would have had the chance to talk, establish and reiterate the autonomy of teaching and the freedom of research, if they deemed it appropriate and they felt it necessary. The result would have been a public and transparent exchange of opinions, and it would be hard to be scared of this.
It is obvious — or so it should be for everyone — that a university is not and must not be a place closed to the circulation of ideas and experiences.