Zaid M. Belbagi: Has the Shahada really become fair game/Khalaf Ahmad Al Habtoor: Saudi Arabia, a target of hypocrisy and double standards/Yara al-Wazir:Is Facebook the answer to the expat workers’ dilemmas

Has the Shahada really become fair game?
Zaid M. Belbagi/Al Arabiya/January/16
Where do we draw the line? Given that we live in increasingly mixed societies, with people of different faiths and backgrounds, should there be limits on free speech when it is offensive? For the sake of not disturbing the peace and building cohesive societies, leading publications have a job to set the tone and to challenge hate. The 20th century saw some of the worst crimes inflicted on minority groups in the history of humanity, central to their committal was hate. Unchecked, racially charged discourse is a scourge of modern society that challenges the right of all to live in relative peace and security. The United Kingdom, the world’s oldest democracy and champion of the right to Free Speech enacted legislation to clamp down on “Racial and Religious Hatred” in 2006, recognizing there should be boundaries to what can and should be said. Earlier this week The Times published a cartoon by Morten Morland in clear reference to the flag of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and ergo the Islamic Declaration of Faith, the Shahada. In associating this central message of Islam with a series of demonic ghouls and villainous figures, the cartoon draws a clear link between Islam and horror. This cannot be allowed to take place.
The Times is a paper of great pedigree, with a reputation of top tier journalism stretching three centuries. Therefore, given the history and standing of the publication, there is no doubt that it should be conscious of its role in adopting some societal trends and avoiding those as unsavory as religious hatred.
Political satire can surely be depicted without involving the Shahada. Such casual racism cannot be allowed to stand. Interestingly, satire, the great political device and source of good wit for many came to prominence during the same period as the first print of The Times. There are those that may argue Morland’s cartoon aimed to make a political point, whatever the means of course, after all the swathes of the British press treat Islam as fair game. However, such political satire can surely be depicted without involving the Shahada. Any person with a rudimentary knowledge of the Arabic language can clearly see (as most Muslims do) the words “Allah” and “Mohammed” depicted through drawings of ghouls. One could contend that such depictions were aimed directly at the Muslim community, or at least those with a knowledge of Arabic script. It seems disrespect was not only meant, but cleverly woven into the fabric of the supposed irony of this cartoon. Such casual racism cannot be allowed to stand. Therein lies the problem. The global Muslim community is not a minority denomination but an expansive group of humanity with a voice. Had such a cartoon ridiculed the central maxim of another faith, The Times would be the subject of public scolding and in the receipt of letters of complaint. Respect is earned, not given. The only answer to halt such mockery is to put pen to paper and to make one’s voice heard.
I am afraid many in the Muslim world have forgotten how to write.

Saudi Arabia, a target of hypocrisy and double standards
Khalaf Ahmad Al Habtoor/Al Arabiya/January/16
To my astonishment and dismay Western powers, human rights groups and international institutions have ganged-up against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia alleging ‘human rights abuses’ over its execution of 47 terrorists, tried and sentenced for their crimes following lengthy transparent trials. Rather than salute the Kingdom for its policy of zero tolerance of terrorists, many of Saudi Arabia’s so-called allies seek to undermine its efforts with scurrilous statements and condemnatory rhetoric. Such criticism not only has little basis in fact in many cases it is spewed by some of the biggest human rights abusers on the planet.
No country has the right to interfere with another’s domestic affairs let alone criticism its laws or judicial process. Every state must protect its people and state institutions from those who would do harm in the best way it sees fit – and this is especially pertinent in a region splintered by violence and conflict.
Firstly, Saudi, that borders war torn Yemen and Iraq and is being openly threatened by Iran, is particularly in a sensitive situation, which is why it cannot afford to turn a blind eye to snakes within plotting its downfall no matter their religious persuasion.
Glass houses and hypocrisy 101
Secondly, the Kingdom is the victim here when its embassy and consulate in Iran came under state-sponsored mob attacks; their computers and documents stolen even as diplomats called upon authorities for help which went unheeded. Yet, instead of condemning the Iranian government for once again breaching diplomatic norms, the United States, the United Kingdom and the United Nations are blaming Saudi Arabia for executing a Saudi Shiite cleric who organized violent demonstrations against the government, supported terrorist cells and used his sermons to call for the overthrow of the state.
Rather than salute the Kingdom for its policy of zero tolerance of terrorists, many of Saudi Arabia’s so-called allies seek to undermine its efforts. Thirdly, this is a case of people in glass houses. Take the U.S. whose invasion of Iraq spawned ISIS and was the prime mover of the sectarian divisions Iraq and its neighbors now face. When we remember Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, renditions, torture and the ongoing extrajudicial assassination’s, clearly President Barack Obama’s staff have taken courses in hypocrisy 101. White House Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes has urged the Saudi government to show respect for human rights while senior administration figures slam Riyadh for “an apparent absence of due process” and “negligent disregard” for acting in ways that destabilize the region.
If there is one country to be blamed for inflaming the area, it is the United States that removed Saddam Hussein, a buffer between Iranian expansionism and Gulf States, toppled Muammar Qaddafi abandoning Libya to armed militias and stood aside as ISIS swept over great swathes of Iraq and Syria. Those errors of judgment were compounded last year by Obama’s nuclear pact with the devil. And how can anyone take U.S. critics seriously when the country’s presidential candidates call for all Muslim visitors to be banned along with vetted refugees including orphans as young as five-years-old? What moral right does America have to wag its finger at others over the death penalty when 31 of its states variously hang condemned prisoners, place them before a firing squad, subjected them to electrocution, gas them or finish them off with lethal injections which often go wrong? Last year a death row inmate Joseph Wood suffered one of the longest executions in U.S. history taking two hours to die from a botched lethal injection. Since 1976, the U.S. has executed 1,423 convicts, 28 in 2015 and 35 in 2014. Analysis undertaken by legal experts in Michigan and Pennsylvania found that 4.1 percent were victims of a miscarriage of justice. Kudos to Obama for issuing an executive order related to gun control, but his tears for the victims of gun crimes merely echoed U.S. double standards when it is the world’s greatest supplier of lethal weapons.
Civil and political rights
The EU, which never fails to jump to Washington’s command, has issued a statement asserting the execution of Sheikh Nimr Al-Nimr raises “serious concerns regarding freedom of expression and the respect of basic civil and political rights.” That complaint rings hollow from countries with refugees fleeing bombs and terrorism stuck in the freezing cold without food on their borders pleading to be allowed entry when it is their duty to give them asylum under international refugee conventions.
As for basic civil and political rights, France rightly banned demonstrations in response to terrorist attacks while deploying the army to patrol its streets. When a country is threatened – as France was and Saudi Arabia is – it tightens its security to ensure its people’s safety.
Britain’s comments have been fairly low key for which Prime Minister David Cameron is being criticized. However, the Foreign Office reiterated the UK’s opposition to the “death penalty in all circumstances” as undermining human dignity. That view is Britain’s prerogative, but why is the government singling out Saudi when its closest ally, the U.S. is high on the death penalty statistics list along in company with Iran, Iraq and North Korea?
The same can be said for the United Nations. Its Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has cited concerns over the nature of the charges and fairness of the judicial process, while urging Saudi to commute all death sentences. Who is he to judge the fairness of Saudi trials when he was not present – and why does he not address similar remarks to the governments of China, Iran and the U.S.? The U.N. would do well to concentrate on its problems when its peacekeepers are being investigated for the sexual exploitation of underage girls and women in the Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Haiti, Liberia and South Sudan.
Criticisms from the leaderships of Iraq would be laughable if the matter was not as serious. “Violating human rights leads to repercussions on the security, stability and the social fabric of the peoples of the region,” Iraqi Prime Minister, Haider al-Abadi. Well, he should know! His government is one of the biggest violators of human rights and the greatest conductor of oppression and sectarian bias having sold out the Iraqi people to Tehran. When Arab country after Arab country is breaking off relations with Iran, his Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari was in Tehran .
Naturally, human rights organizations have jumped on the bashing Saudi Arabia bandwagon with enthusiasm. Human Rights Watch, accused of being a revolving door for the CIA, accuses Saudi of discriminating against Shiite citizens, notwithstanding that Nimr was one of few Shiites executed among the 47. Reprieve urged the UK not to “turn a blind eye to such atrocities”. What atrocities; the execution of terrorists? Amnesty International which seemingly is prioritizing the rights of terrorists over their victims stated the carrying out of dozens of executions on the same day marks “a dizzying descent to yet another outrageous low for Saudi Arabia”. Would it have been acceptable if the executions had been stretched out over a year as they are in the U.S.?
It is strange that these groups are focusing on the Kingdom whereas over 700 individuals have been hanged by Iran in the first half of last year (many of them Sunnis), a female cartoonist is on trial for the ‘crime’ of shaking hands with her lawyer, a woman was sentenced to be stoned to death as recently as last December and poets and writers are being rounded up and tried.
In short, countries with blood on their hands should mind their own business. Saudi Arabia and its Arab allies have had enough of foreign interference and are resolved to stand against Iranian plots whatever it takes.
We will no longer listen to states that I believe contributed to our dangerous neighborhood. The reaction of Saudi Arabia’s fake allies is both disappointing and eye-opening. At least now we know which states to trust and those we cannot, a lesson I pray has been well learned.

Is Facebook the answer to the expat workers’ dilemmas?
Yara al-Wazir/Al Arabiya/January/16
Gulf states are home to over 2.4 million domestic workers, according to Human Rights Watch. Yet these migrant workers, often of Southeast Asian origin, at times experience little protection. There have been cases in which expat workers have been subjected to poor working conditions, strenuous environments, and an average workweek of up to 60 hours in the region. Unfortunately, sometimes media outlets report about a number of employers who are confiscating the workers’ ID and passports upon arrival into their homes, though GCC officials say such a habit is illegal, which makes the escape process – should it ever be needed – even more terrifying.In my opinion, there are two primary reasons as to why domestic workers are subjected to these conditions: the implementation of specific labor laws protecting their rights and well-being, as well as social alienation from their host communities and therefore a lack of education and understanding of their rights.
Facebook as a means of human rights education
Social media is a tool that can step in to fill the gaps in communication. Although not every domestic worker has access to the Internet, the ones who do are using social media to document their trials and tribulations. In November 2015, a group of Ethiopian maids in Kuwait managed to leak cell-phone footage of the conditions they are subjected to in a prison cell. After this surfaced, the Ethiopian embassy announced that the women were now awaiting deportation. A group of lawyers and activists offered to step in and help pay the fees in order to shorten their sentences. In the video, the women claim they have been beaten and abused. This is not the first case where domestic workers publish videos on Facebook in order to garner attention.
Mobile phones must become a basic right
As argued by Mark Zuckerburg, a connected mobile phone needs to become a basic human right. In the case of domestic workers in the Gulf, this is needed now more than ever. A mobile phone can provide them with the social connectivity with their community and allow them to maintain their mental and psychological well-being. More importantly, a mobile phone offers a chance of rescue and refuge. It allows domestic workers the opportunity to get in contact with their embassy if they are having issues with their employer, or in a worst-case scenario, even contact the police for more urgent issues, such as rape or physical abuse. Additionally, a mobile phone can be used as an educative tool to raise awareness of their rights. A Facebook group called UAE Labor Law Clarifications offers free advice on labor laws, dealing with difficult employers, and how to get out. The group has over 90,000 members.
Home and host governments are equally responsible.
Ultimately, there is only so much that an embassy can do for its citizens. The cost of deportation or removal from the host country can be seen as a challenge in cases where the employer does not regularly pay the domestic worker. This can be overcome with a simple arrival kit provided by employment agencies, which includes a newly-opened bank account. A bank account means that if the domestic worker has to run away and leave her belongings behind, his/her money would still be safe and secure in a bank account, therefore allowing her to pay for her flight home. There is plenty that host governments can do. In 2014, GCC member states agreed on terms in the contracts of domestic workers, including an 8-hour work day and a day off every week, but the methods of implementation and enforcement have not been made clear.Ultimately, it is the responsibility of both the host and the domestic worker’s home government to educate both the employer and the employee of their rights in order to end the abuse.