Former Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has said that Turkey’s democratic reforms give the entire Muslim world hope for the future of the Arab Spring.

Ibrahim discussed on Thursday the overlapping roles of Islam and democracy in the reforms sweeping North Africa and the Middle East at this month’s Alliance of Civilizations meeting in ?stanbul. “The Muslim masses want leadership,” Ibrahim said. “The Muslim world needs an effective voice to represent the call for freedom and justice.” Turkey’s role and influence in the Arab Spring is “critical,” Ibrahim stressed, adding that both the Western and Muslim world are looking to Turkey and Indonesia, another flourishing Muslim democracy, at a time of great political change.

The developments in Turkey, Indonesia and in the Arab Spring countries offer the Muslim world a fresh voice, Ibrahim said.

The Malaysian politician described the excitement that bubbled among the masses and the complete silence of the leaders of the repressive regimes of countries that witnessed the Arab Spring uprisings. “This is why I was excited when the prime minister came out and presented the issue of human rights, the issue of freedom for all and the issue of dignity for all men and women as a universal construct, not just a Turkish or Western construct,” he said. “It was timely that the prime minister took a position that no leader can continue without representing the sentiments and aspirations of the people.” “I remain optimistic about the Arab Spring and the future of the Muslim world. We see how Turkey has navigated [successful democratization efforts and reforms],” said Ibrahim of the Muslim world’s generally positive view of Turkey. “Keep up the good work,” he encouraged.

Democracy is often heralded as an ideal that belongs to the West, but Ibrahim disagreed.

“Democracy is not just a Western construct,” Ibrahim said. “Do you realize that Indonesia, the largest Muslim democracy in the world, had free, democratic elections in 1955?”

Ibrahim said he used to joke with former US Vice President Al Gore that Indonesia’s elections in 1955 were far more democratic than Florida’s in 2000. “Why do you think Muslim countries have risen up against exploitation, imperialism and colonization? Because they honor freedom,” he told the crowd gathered at the prime minister’s office in Dolmabahçe Palace.

“The Arab Spring will not be successful if it follows a Western model,” Ibrahim emphasized. And on the question of what sort of government should be established in the place of the toppled regimes, Ibrahim said simply, “Let the Arabs decide.”

But there are universal principles, Ibrahim said, that will not be compromised. “The freedom of expression, the freedom of speech and the battle against corruption and greed … these values we will not compromise,” he said.

Contrasting Turkey, Malaysia’s ‘democracies’

“Turkey is a democracy. Malaysia is not,” Ibrahim said matter-of-factly. Ibrahim argued it is wrong to call Malaysia a democracy. “There is not one free media outlet in Malaysia,” he said.

On Thursday morning, Ibrahim said he read on the front page of a Turkish newspaper a stringent criticism of the prime minister’s most recent comments. “This is what a democracy is all about — the right to disagree,” he said.

“I often joke that in Malaysia we have freedom of speech, but not after speech,” said Ibrahim, who was fired from his position as deputy prime minister and arrested after speaking out against the Malaysian prime minister.

Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya (SPR) diingatkan supaya tidak sibuk dengan isu-isu kecil dan prosedur tetapi sebaliknya memberi tumpuan utama kepada membersihkan daftar pemilih, kata Ketua Pembangkang, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

“Tanggungjawab lebih besar bagi SPR adalah membersihkan pilihan raya, bersihkan daftar pemilih, pastikan pilihan raya yang adil dan akses media untuk semua (parti yang bertanding).

“SPR tidak harus terikat atau sibuk dengan perkara-perkara kecil kerana itu prosedur biasa. Ini satu cubaan untuk mengalihkan perhatian rakyat,” katanya pada sidang akhbar di Wangsa Maju hari ini.

Beliau mengulas laporan dalam akhbar The Star hari ini bahawa SPR akan menghentikan amalan mengadakan perarakan pada hari penamaan calon pilihan raya.

Parti-parti pembangkang sebelum ini menuduh SPR berdolak dalik berhubung syor dan cadangan yang telah dibuat oleh jawatankuasa terpilih khas parlimen (PSC) berhubung pembaharuan dalam sistem pilihan raya di negara ini.

Langkah terbaru SPR itu menimbulkan kebimbangan di kalangan parti pembangkang yang sebelum ini seringkali menuduh badan itu menyebelahi kerajaan yang diterajui BN dan sering cuba melambatkan reformasi pilihan raya.

Recent comments by Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim have demonstrated yet again how issues related to Israel continue to divide this majority-Muslim country – and could influence the country’s next national election.

In a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal, Mr. Anwar responded to the question of whether he would open diplomatic ties with Israel by stating his “support” for “efforts to protect the security of the state of Israel,” while at the same time backing the “legitimate rights of the Palestinians.” He stopped short of saying he would establish diplomatic relations between the two states – what he describes as a “tricky” issue – and stated that any change to the status quo would remain contingent on Israel recognizing the aspirations of the Palestinians.

Malaysia is one of three Southeast Asian nations including Indonesia and Brunei that does not have diplomatic relations with Israel, though limited economic ties exist between private companies in both countries.

“Some refuse to recognize the state of Israel,” he said, “but I think our policy should be clear – protect the security [of Israel] but you must be as firm in protecting the legitimate interests of the Palestinians.”

The comments triggered a storm of debate and criticism, with members of the ruling United Malays National Organization (UMNO) and other groups accusing the leader of abandoning the Palestinian cause – an emotive cause long-supported in the majority-Muslim Southeast Asian nation.

Lawmakers called on Mr. Anwar’s opposition coalition to release an official statement on the issue, while president of the right-wing Malay group Perkasa Ibrahim Ali said he would raise the issue in Parliament.

Mr. Anwar responded by saying he supported a “two-state solution” with Palestine, a policy he said was no different from the official stance adopted by the United Nations and Malaysia itself.

“I am issuing a stern warning to anyone trying to twist my statement just so that they can say that I have betrayed the aspirations of the Palestinian people,” he said in a statement to the press. His party’s stand “is to defend the rights of whoever it is that has been victimised,” the statement said.

Though an ethnically-diverse nation that practices freedom of religion, Malaysia has declared Islam as its state religion and tensions over Israel-Palestine issues often boil over. A large percentage of the country’s population supports the Palestinian cause, and jumped to criticize Israel after it launched raids on Gaza in December 2008 and stormed a flotilla in May 2010 that was carrying activists and humanitarian aid to Gaza.

Tensions over the issue are even more on edge now, as Malaysia gears up for its next general election, which must be called by early next year, giving politicians more incentive to argue their views in the press than usual.

“The issue is tied in with Malaysia being an Islamic country,” and the idea that “therefore it should support Palestine,” said James Chin, a professor at the Malaysian branch of Australia’s Monash University. He added the caveat that support for the Palestinians became a much larger issue in Malaysian politics after the era of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who has been accused by world leaders of holding anti-Semitic views, which he disputes.

In a statement to the local press, Malaysian Foreign Minister Anifah Aman, a member of the ruling UMNO, disputed Mr. Anwar’s claim that Malaysia’s current policy on Israel is the same as his own. Although Malaysia officially supports a “two-state solution” in settling the Israel-Palestinian conflict, it has also sharply criticized actions taken by Israeli forces in the past, which the foreign minister indicated means Malaysia isn’t supporting “all steps” to protect Israeli security.

“[Anwar’s comments] show a blanket support for anything Israel does,” said Khairy Jamaluddin, the chief of UMNO’s youth wing, who disputed any suggestion Malaysia’s ruling party was trying to politicize the issue ahead of an election. “The issue of Palestine is a top foreign policy priority for my party, it would be an issue during the election year or otherwise… timing doesn’t matter.”

In 2010, Mr. Anwar – who in the past has been described as the face of liberal democracy in Malaysia – found himself on the other side of the argument after he lambasted UMNO for its relationship with a public relations firm called APCO. In Parliament, he said the firm was “controlled by Zionists” and working on behalf of the American government to influence Malaysian government policy – a charge denied by both the government and the public relations firm.

At the time, American-Jewish groups such as B’nai B’rith accused the opposition leader of “anti-Jewish” and “anti-Israel” slanders, and called on American officials to suspend their ties with Mr. Anwar.

Still, many analysts believe the latest kerfuffle is largely electioneering on the part of the ruling coalition, preoccupied with the looming possibility that the next election will be the hardest-fought yet.

“They’re just using it as a weapon to bring (Mr. Anwar) down,” said Mr. Chin at Monash University.

– Celine Fernandez contributed to this article

Hamas Foreign Minister We Accept Two-State Solution With ’67 Borders The Two-Way NPR

Hamas’ Deputy Foreign Minister Ghazi Hamad told NPR’s Robert Siegel that the Islamic political party has accepted a two-state solution that respects the 1967 borders.

Robert asked Hamad in a very straight forward way: “If Israel were to accept a two-state solution in which Palestine would be in Gaza and the West Bank and have its capital in Jerusalem, is that an acceptable aim that Hamas is striving for or is that in and of itself insufficient because there would still be a state of Israel?”

“Look, we said, frankly, we accept the state and ’67 borders. This was mentioned many times and we repeated many times,” said Hamad. Here’s his full answer:

Hamas, which has been known for its rocket attacks and suicide bombings, just signed a reconciliation with its secular rival Fatah. In 2007, Hamas expelled Fatah from Gaza and the Palestinians ended up with a divided government. According to analysts, the reconciliation between the two groups means Hamas is trying to moderate its views to appeal to the West.

Hamad told Robert that people should not judge Hamas on what it used to be before:

“I think Hamas shows a lot of flexibility. We became more pragmatic, more realistic. Hamas is ready to go more and more for political solutions. Hamas could be a good player in making peace in this region, but don’t use sticks against him, and punishment against Hamas,” Hamad said, referring to the sanctions imposed after Hamas won a decisive majority in the Palestinian Parliament in 2006.

In an analysis piece by the Associated Press, they point out that Hamas’ more moderate stance may be genuine:

Both Hamas officials and outside analysts say the group has learned some bitter lessons during its four years in power in Gaza. The impression is that Israel’s blockade, which caused widespread hardship in the crowded territory, a blistering Israeli military offensive two years ago and the uprisings throughout the Arab world have all factored into its thinking.

Hani Masri, a Palestinian commentator who sometimes mediates between Hamas and its secular rival, Fatah, said Hamas realized that to lead the Palestinians, it needs “acceptance by the international community, particularly the West.”

In his interview with Robert, Hamad did criticize Israel. He said the ball is now in its court and it needs to decide whether it’s willing to accept a Palestinian state with its capital in Jerusalem and whether it’s willing to “evict” its settlers in Palestinian territory.

“We are just fighting against occupation,” Hamad said. “We are figting to liberate our homeland. This our ambition.”

Hamad also said Hamas was “not in the pocket” of Iran or Syria. Hamad made much the same comments on the BBC’s Hardtalk. But PressTV, the Iranian government’s English-language news service, reports that Hamad told them Hamas would “never recognize Israel.”

For it’s part, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made it clear that Israel wants nothing to do with a Palestinian government that includes Hamas.

“A leopard has sunk its teeth in our flesh, in the flesh of our children, wives, our elderly, and we will not be tempted to believe that this leopard has now changed its spots,” Netanyahu told the AP. “We will not ignore its voracious growls. We will strike it down.”

Note we’ve added the interview as it aired on All Things Considered at the top of this post.

=====

From New York Times

One day after celebrating a landmark reconciliation accordfor Palestinian unity, Khaled Meshal, the Hamas leader, said on Thursday that he was fully committed to working for a two-state solution but declined to swear off violence or agree that a Palestinian state would produce an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Related

Palestinian Factions Sign Accord to End Rift (May 5, 2011)
“The whole world knows what Hamas thinks and what our principles are,” Mr. Meshal said in an interview in his Cairo hotel suite. “But we are talking now about a common national agenda. The world should deal with what we are working toward now, the national political program.”

He defined that as “a Palestinian state in the 1967 lines with Jerusalem as its capital, without any settlements or settlers, not an inch of land swaps and respecting the right of return” of Palestinian refugees to Israel itself.

Asked if a deal honoring those principles would produce an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Mr. Meshal said, “I don’t want to talk about that.”

He added: “When Israel made agreements with Egypt and Jordan, no one conditioned it on how Israel should think. The Arabs and the West didn’t ask Israel what it was thinking deep inside. All Palestinians know that 60 years ago they were living on historic Palestine from the river to the sea. It is no secret.”

Asked whether in his pact with Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Fatah-dominatedPalestinian Authority, he agreed to end violent resistance, he replied: “Where there is occupation and settlement, there is a right to resistance. Israel is the aggressor. But resistance is a means, not an end.”

He added that over the coming months, as Hamas and Fatah work out their differences, “we are ready to reach an agreement on how to manage resistance.” He noted that Hamas had entered into cease-fires with Israel in the past and that it was ready to do so in the future. There is one in effect right now. But his broad principle, he said, was this: “If occupation ends, resistance ends. If Israel stops firing, we stop firing.”

Asked if he thought nonviolent resistance was a useful approach for the Palestinians, he replied, “Unfortunately, nonviolence doesn’t work against the Israelis.”

Israel has blasted the Fatah-Hamas agreement as, in effect, bringing terrorists into the Palestinian government. The United States has said it is waiting to see what the pact consists of before reacting. Washington provides hundreds of millions of dollars a year to the Palestinian Authority.

“We are going to be carefully assessing what this action really means,” Secretary of StateHillary Rodham Clinton said of the pact in Rome. She said that Washington could not accept a Palestinian government including Hamas unless it renounced violence, agreed to live by previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements and recognized Israel. These are the so-called “quartet principles,” agreed on by the United States, United Nations, European Union and Russia.

Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain made a similar point during a visit to London by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel. Any new Palestinian government “must reject violence, recognize Israel’s right to exist and engage in the peace process,” a spokesman for Mr. Cameron quoted him as saying.

Mr. Abbas, who has largely given up on peace negotiations with Israel under Mr. Netanyahu, concluded that the best way forward was national unity and an appeal to the international community to create a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem.

His Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority holds sway in the West Bank, but Hamas runs Gaza. The two groups fought a brief civil war in 2007 and have been divided ever since. The agreement they signed this week calls for a new government of technocrats to plan for elections in the coming year as well as committees to coordinate security cooperation and questions like prisoner releases.

But the bitterness runs deep and many challenges remain. Mr. Meshal noted in the 30-minute interview that at the unity ceremony in Cairo on Wednesday, there had been a delay because Mr. Abbas had not initially agreed that Mr. Meshal could speak from the podium.

“I don’t want to go into the details of it, but there was an unfortunate wrong and we overcame it,” he said of the ceremony arrangements. “This is not the superficial issue of who is sitting on the stage. The crucial issue is that there has been a division between the two main parties in the Palestinian arena. Reconciliation should be seen in the arrangement and in who is speaking.”

Asked what had changed in recent months that allowed the long-delayed pact to go through, he said that both Fatah and the new Egyptian government had agreed, for the first time, to Hamas’s adding annexes to the agreement reflecting its views. He declined to elaborate on the contents of those additional items.

Mr. Meshal said that there was recent activity on ways to release Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier held for nearly five years by Hamas, but that there had been no breakthrough. He blamed Mr. Netanyahu, saying he was responsible for the delay.

Budaya debat antara pemimpin selaras dengan tuntutan al-Quran dan menjadi tradisi kepimpinan silam tamadun dunia, kata Ketua Penerangan KEADILAN, Dr Muhammad Nur Manuty.

Sambil memetik Surah An-Nahl: 125, beliau berkata budaya itu lumrah ilmuan dan kepimpinan silam kerana kebenaran akan lebih terserlah dan pandangan baru dapat dicerna demi kepentingan negara dan rakyat.

“Lebih penting, rakyat diberi peluang menilai secara empirikal dan adil akan ketrampilan dan keikhlasan kepimpinan yang diberi amanah mengurus negara pada masa depan.

“Inilah demokrasi sebenar yang dituntut oleh rakyat,” katanya pada kenyataan media, hari ini.

Dr Muhammad Nur kesal dengan keengganan Datuk Seri Najib Razak menyahut seruan Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim untuk berdebat secara terbuka mengenai isu politik, ekonomi dan kebajikan rakyat yang sedang hangat diperkata.

“Pemimpin yang enggan bersemuka dan bertentang mata memberi persepsi ketidakikhlasan dan ketidakjujuran. Ia mempamer bahawa ada rahsia yang mahu disorok.

“Apakah sebenarnya mahu disembunyikan dari rakyat itu?  Umno wajib menjelaskannya,” kata beliau yang menganggap alasan parti itu sebagai memual dan menjengkelkan.

Beliau menyifatkan keengganan Najib berdebat adalah manifestasi dari lesunya daya fikir dan intelek kepimpinan Umno dalam politik semasa yang mengamal budaya telus dan terbuka.

“Najib sebenar lebih beruntung kerana dikelilingi ratusan pegawai dan pembantu yang bersiap siaga dengan bekalan idea dan maklumat,” kata beliau.

Beliau juga percaya Umno belum berhenti dari muslihatnya untuk memperbodoh dan menindas minda rakyat untuk kekal berkuasa dan meneruskan penyelewengan tanpa sekatan.

Katanya, KEADILAN kesal kerana Umno yang memerintah sejak 54 tahun lalu, menghina dan merendah-rendahkan kemampuan rakyat Malaysia membuat penilaian.

“Jika benarlah rakyat masih belum mampu menerima debat kepimpinan secara terbuka, bukankah ini  bukti kegagalan Umno sendiri?” katanya.