Iran: Blogging the Revolution in the Aftermath of Sham Elections

Updates and additional resources for June 17, 2009

I’ve added some additional news and opinion resources from Germany (Deutsche Welle, Atlantic Community Initiative in Berlin) along with blog posts and reports from the Middle East Institute in Washington DC. Veteran foreign correspondent/editor Lindsey Hilsum from ITN CH4 News (UK) has been doing a good job of covering the Iranian elections so I have added her reports to the reading list. Last but not least I am including the Iranian-American powered website Tehran Bureau along with Iran’s new online global news channel in English, Press TV. Like many people worldwide I am anxiously waiting for the big showdown tomorrow in the streets of Tehran by opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi’s supporters. Let’s hope that the rally goes off peacefully and achieves its objective of forcing a repeat of the election in a fair and transparent manner___ if that is at all possible under the present regime.

Original post from June 16, 2009

The minute-by-minute news following the disputed Iranian elections of June 12th is breaking so fast it is very difficult to follow let alone compose a blog post. As of this writing a number of international news teams in Iran are reporting that the Iranian government has ordered a lockdown on foreign journalists from reporting about the (illegal) protest rallies of the opposition. However, the foreign press and media in the country are free to report about the ongoing pro-government rallies in support of the incumbent president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

It has been clear for several days now that the Iranian Internet Police and security forces have not been very successful in preventing supporters of the opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi from using the Internet and mobile communications to communicate with one another and the outside world. This is understandable when one realizes that young Iranians have been some of the most avid contributors over the past few years to social media technologies and the practice of free speech on blogs and social networking platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter. The Iranian sector of the blogosphere is one of the largest and most sophisticated online communities in the world so the Iranian internal security forces are up against some of the most tech-savvy young people online. These dynamic young people have lots of friends and supporters right around the globe that are eager to help them outmaneuver the Iranian regime’s cyber-police. Therefore the use of Internet filters and blocking software by the security forces in Iran is of no use forcing them to resort to the old-fashioned way of shutting down opposition voices___ guns and batons and torture and intimidation.

What has also been interesting to watch is the cooperation between mainstream news media and blog authors during the run up to the elections and the days since the announcement of the disputed election results (see CNN iReport/Iran). Where in the past these two groups regularly exchanged insults and harsh criticisms of each other’s performance in covering and reporting relevant news stories, today bloggers and authors on social networks, professional journalists and news editors/producers are relying heavily upon one another to report fast-breaking news events from inside Iran in the face of increasing repression of free speech and free press coverage by the Tehran regime.

I do sincerely hope that in this unprecedented online collaboration of citizen and professional journalists and news commentators that the ‘pros’ continually remind the amateurs about the dangers of reporting from within a crisis zone. The threat of a ‘new revolution’ from inside Iran is a very dangerous business and the use of online communications and publication tools that may help fuel such a revolution is a journey into uncharted waters__ so be damn careful.

Of course I have been discussing these exciting events with Iranian friends here in Germany on an almost daily basis. Germany is one of Iran’s most coveted trading partners (largest) and despite decades of business dealings and diplomatic ties with Iran the present coalition government in Berlin claims to have little sway over Tehran (see Germany’s Spiegel Online and Israeli newspaper articles below). The ruling administration in Berlin and Brussels, like their counterparts in Washington D.C. and Paris, have been rather mute in the face of the unfolding crisis on the ground in Iran for fear of screwing up negotiations over the nuclear arms/energy issues and Iran’s role in a peace settlement between Israel and the Palestinians and Arab countries in the region. There are more than 1900 German firms doing business in Iran so the claim by the German government to have little influence over internal politics in the country is sheer bullshit.

Anyway, my two closest Iranian buddies have both witnessed life in Iran during the time of the Shah as well as the period following the Iranian Revolution of 1979 (see Al Jazeera’s special coverage of the 30th anniversary of the Iranian Revolution). Although we have often discussed what it may be like when the day of true independence finally arrives in Iran, I seem to be the one who is most nervous about the unfolding events in the aftermath of these sham elections. I dread the coming brutal crackdown by a regime that will hold onto power at any cost which is kind of ironic when I also remember for the past 30 years much of what many people in the West saw on the news was 10’s-of- thousands of Iranians marching in the streets chanting “Death to America!” and “Death to Israel!” My older friend Reza explains the prospects of increased violence against the protestors on the street with the expression, “In order to make this omelette you must break a few eggs…” while my younger friend Asgar has repeatedly warned for many months that America must stay out of this fight so as not to undermine the opposition to extremist leaders like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the group of conservative Islamic clerics who pull his strings.

Therefore my views and emotions are mixed about the possibility of real change in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s foreign policies toward the U.S. and other western countries under any leadership that must answer to the regime of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameni. I shall reserve my opinions about the hope for change in Iran until this developing story unravels a bit more over the next days and weeks. However, the 2009 Iranian presidential election is covered thoroughly in the news articles, think-tank analysis, and blog posts listed below. So please have a look at my suggested reading list for a better understanding of what the hell is going on over in Iran.


The ‘Jewels in the Jungle’ 2009 Iran Election Recommended Reading List
Week of June 14-21, 2009

Foreign Policy Magazine - The Blogs
FP Passport
Iran Election Special (full coverage by FP’s editors and contributors)
The latest from Iran by Blake Hounshell 06/16/09
Morning Brief: Khamenei steps in 06/15/09
Iran: What now? a must-read roundup 06/13/09

The Cable (editor: Laura Rozen)
Obama on Iran: diplomacy without illusions 06/15/09

Shadow Government (editors: experienced policy makers from the loyal opposition)
What Obama needs to say and do about Iran by Christian Brose 06/15/09

Stephen M. Walt (professor of international relations @ Harvard)
What does Iran's "election" mean? 06/15/09

Mark Lynch (Abu Aardvark’s Middle East blog)
Could there be a Mousavi Effect? 06/10/09

Foreign Policy Magazine – May/June 2009 issues
Iran's New Revolution by Cameron Abadi
Iran's Potato Revolution (a profile of candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi) by Mehrzad Boroujerdi

Informed Comment (Middle East scholar Juan Cole)
Ahmadinejad reelected under a cloud of fraud (Salon.com) 06/13/09
Stealing the Iranian Election 06/13/09

The New York Times - global edition
The Lede Blog (editor: Robert Mackey)
Latest Updates on Iran’s Disputed Election 06/16/09
Updates on Iran’s Disputed Election 06/15/09
Landslide or Fraud? The Debate Online Over Iran’s Election Results 06/13/09

Spiegel Online – international edition
After the Election: Iran's Growing Societal Chasm 06/15/09
The Election in Iran: 'Extraordinary Amount of Wishful Thinking' by US 06/15/09
The World from Berlin: 'Iran Was Never a True Democracy' 06/15/09
The Afghanistan Debate: Germany Mulls Future as Attacks Surge 06/12/09

Articles about German trade with Iran
Haaretz News Online (Israel)
In spite of German talk, trade with Iran growing Feb 2008
The Jerusalem Post
Germany's special relationship - with Iran Aug 2008

TIME.com
Iran's Lesson: Even in a Tainted Election, Voting Still Matters 06/16/09
Ayatullah vs. Ayatullah: Could Khamenei Be Vulnerable? 06/15/09
Why the White House Views Iran's Election as a Diplomatic Coup 06/15/09
Was Ahmadinejad's Win Rigged? - Five Reasons to Suspect Iran's Election Results

Al Jazeera News – English edition
Government supporters rally in Iran 06/16/09
Iran bans pro-Mousavi rally 06/15/09
Iranian writer (Azar Nafisi on poll result) 06/14/09
Al Jazeera English - IRAN: AFTER THE REVOLUTION February 2009

Global Voices Online
(providing one of the best daily roundups of bloggers inside Iran and around the globe)
Iran: Protest and Repression 06/15/09
Iran: Storm of protest after election 06/13/09
Mapping Iran’s Blogosphere on Election Eve 06/11/09
Global Voices Online » Iranian Election 2009 special coverage

The Internet and Democracy Project @ Harvard University
Cracking Down on Digital Communication and Political Organizing in Iran 06/15/09
Mapping Iran’s Blogosphere on Election Eve 06/11/09

The Council on Foreign Relations
U.S. Should React Cautiously to Iran’s ‘Stolen Election’ 06/14/09
Guardians of the Revolution: Iran and the World in the Age of the Ayatollahs
A CFR book by Iran scholar Ray Takeh – Oxford University Press, May 2009
Obama's Message to Muslims Resonates, But Challenges Await 06/04/09
An interview with CFR senior fellow for Middle Eastern Studies Steven A. Cook
Beyond Cairo: Translating 'Important' Obama Message into Policies 06/04/09
An interview with former U.S. Ambassador to Syria Edward Djerejian

VOA News Online
US Bloggers Take On Iran's Elections 06/15/09

BBC News
'Mass opposition rally' in Tehran 06/16/09
Shots fired at huge Iran protest 06/15/09
Iran clamps down on foreign media: Bypassing Iran's firewalls 06/15/09

CNN - international edition
Rival demonstrations fill Tehran streets 06/16/09
Hatred, chaos and savage beatings in Tehran 06/15/09
Moussavi vows to 'pay any cost' to fight Iran election results 06/15/09
CNN iReport/IRAN


Updates and additional reading for June 17, 2009

DW World (Germany’s Deutsche Welle online news in English)
German foreign ministry notes irregularities in Iran election 06/17/09
EU deplores recent events in Iran 06/16/09

Atlantic-Community.org (a Berlin-based think tank specializing in transatlantic affairs)
Iran's Fabricated Elections: The US and EU Must React 06/16/09
How to Respond to the Iranian Elections? (an online poll) 06/15/09
Iran's Tactical Foreign Policy Rhetoric 03/03/09

Middle East Institute (Washington DC)
The MEI Editor’s Blog by Michael Collins Dunn, editor of The Middle East Journal
The "Ahmadinejad Won" Interpretation: Why I Think it's Suspect 06/15/09
Gary Sick and Karim Sadjadpour on PBS NewsHour with Jim Lehrer 06/15/09
The Mess in Iran: Praetorian Coup or Clumsy Overreach? 06/13/09

MEI Publications and Reports
Policy Brief: Prospects for Iran’s 2009 Presidential Elections by Dr. Walter Posch

MEI Viewpoints magazine special report: “The Iranian Revolution at 30” (PDF download)
Provocative essays from 53 leading academics and policy experts discuss the revolution’s effects on many different facets of life in Iran, including gender issues, education, the media, the environment, and foreign policy.

ITN CH4 News (UK)
New protests held in Iran 06/17/09
CH4 News Snowblog – Iran elections 2009 (World News Blog)
A day in Iran I will never forget by Lindsey Hilsum 06/16/09
Telephone update report from Iran 06/16/09
(HT: to ‘The Lede Blog’ at the New York Times)
Tehran's clash of ideals by Lindsey Hilsum 06/10/09

Tehran Bureau (a U.S.-based news website from the Iranian-American community)
Iran’s Power Struggle by Gareth Smyth (Beirut) 06/16/09
Stolen Election by Muhammad Sahimi (Los Angeles) 06/13/09
Headlines June 12, 2009 (Iran elections)
Nieman Reports Iran 06/01/09
A Q&A with Melissa Ludtke, editor of ‘Nieman Reports’ at the Nieman Foundation for Journalism (Harvard University) Also see the Nieman Reports Summer 2009 issue ‘Iran: Can its stories be told?”

Press TV (a new global online news service based in Tehran, Iran)
Mousavi calls for truth commission 06/17/09
Iran warns foreign media over coverage 06/17/09
(Presidential candidate Mohsen) Rezaei's ultimatum to Interior Ministry 06/17/09


Technorati tags:Iran USA politics Middle East Europe elections Ahmadinejad Mousavi global voices

Sudan Update: Weapons convoy bombing incident clarified. "U.S.A. didn't do it. It was the Israelis!"

Updates March 28-31, 2009

Information about the ‘UFO incident’ over Sudan is becoming somewhat clearer now. Apparently CBS News was not the original source but the new Egyptian newspaper named Al Shorouk (Hat tip to The Arabist for being on top of the breaking news story from the very beginning).

According to updated reports from the New York Times, The Lede blog at the New York Times, and reports from Israel’s Haaretz Newspaper ‘the Israelis done it!’ The Pentagon and the White House have yet to (officially) comment on the incident but Israel’s outgoing president Ehud Olmert has more-or-less confirmed that it was the IAF in a speech he gave on Thursday (source: Haaretz Newspaper):

Outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert hinted on Thursday at Israel's suspected role in an air-strike that reportedly hit a convoy of arms smugglers as it drove through Sudan toward Egypt in January. "We operate everywhere where we can hit terror infrastructure - in close places, in places further away, everywhere where we can hit terror infrastructure, we hit them and we hit them in a way that increases deterrence," said Olmert, speaking at a conference in Herzliya.

End excerpt___

Time Magazine (TIME.com) has one of the best updated reports that I have read on the raid over Sudan. According to Time.com sources this is what really happened:

TIME.com (Time Magazine)
How Israel Foiled an Arms Convoy Bound for Hamas
March 30, 2009

Israeli fighter-bombers, backed by unmanned drones, were responsible for a mid-January attack on a 23-truck convoy in the Sudanese desert carrying arms to Hamas militants, two highly-placed Israeli security sources revealed to TIME. The attack was a warning to Iran and other adversaries, showing Israel's intelligence capability and its willingness to mount operations far beyond its borders in order to defend itself from gathering threats.

The sources revealed exclusive details about the bold air attack on what they said was an Iranian weapons convoy, which had been transporting rockets and explosives destined for Gaza during the Israeli assault on the small Palestinian territory. They denied earlier news reports that U.S. aircraft had been involved in the attack on the arms convoy as it crossed at night through the Sudanese desert heading for Egypt's poorly guarded border. "The Americans were notified that Israel was going to conduct an air operation in Sudan, but they were not involved," a source said. He denied prior claims by a U.S. television network that a ship and a second convoy were destroyed. "There was only one raid, and it was a major operation," he said, adding that "dozens of aircraft" were used.

F-16 fighter-bombers carried out two runs on the convoy, while F-15 fighter planes circled overhead as a precaution in case hostile aircraft were scrambled from Khartoum or a nearby country. After the first bombing run, drones mounted with high-resolution cameras passed over the burning trucks. The video showed that the convoy had only been partially damaged, so the Israelis ordered a second pass with the F-16s. During the 1,750-mile (2800 km) journey to Sudan and back, the Israeli aircraft refueled in midair over the Red Sea.

The bombing raid came after an intelligence tip-off. In early January, at the height of Israel's assault on Gaza, Israel's foreign intelligence agency Mossad was told by an informant that Iran was planning a major delivery of 120 tons of arms and explosives to Gaza, including anti-tank rockets and Fajir rockets with a 25 mile range and a 45 kg warhead. With little time to plan the operation, naval vessels and helicopters were rushed to the Red Sea in case Israel had to rescue a downed pilot, and the plan was rushed through. "The Israelis had less than a week to pull this all together," a source said.

The Iranian shipment was bound for Port Sudan. From there, according to the security sources, the Iranians had organized a smuggler's convoy of 23 trucks that would take the weapons across Egypt's southern border and up into the Sinai. Hamas would then take charge of the weapons and smuggle them into Gaza through the tunnels unscathed by Israeli bombardments.

It was a route used occasionally by Hamas, but never before on such a large scale, sources said. "This was the first time that the Iranians had tried to send Hamas a shipment this big via Sudan — and it is probably the last," he said. Several Iranians were killed in the raid, along with Sudanese smugglers and drivers, the source claimed. "No doubt the Iranians are checking back to see who might have leaked this to the Israelis," he said.

End excerpt___

American government officials who asked to remain anonymous spoke with The New York Times earlier this week about the air raid in Sudan. Here is how the New York Times describes the incident:

The New York Times
U.S. Officials Say Israel Struck in Sudan by Jeffrey Gettleman and Michael R. Gordon – March 26, 2009

Israeli warplanes bombed a convoy of trucks in Sudan in January that was believed to be carrying arms to be smuggled into Gaza, according to American officials.

Israeli officials refused to confirm or deny the attack, but intelligence analysts noted that the strike was consistent with other measures Israel had taken to secure its borders.

American officials said the airstrike took place as Israel sought to stop the flow of weapons to Gaza during the weeks it was fighting a war with Hamas there.

Two American officials who are privy to classified intelligence assessments said that Iran had been involved in the effort to smuggle weapons to Gaza. They also noted that there had been intelligence reports that an operative with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps had gone to Sudan to coordinate the effort.

But one former official said that the exact provenance of the arms that were being smuggled via Sudan was unclear.

Although the airstrike was carried out two months ago, it was not publicized until Sudanese officials said Thursday that a convoy of trucks in the remote eastern part of Sudan was bombed by what they called “American fighters,” killing dozens. The strikes were first reported on several Internet-based news sites, including CBSNews.com.

End excerpt____

AFRICOM, the new U.S. Africa Command (based in Germany), issued the following statement via their spokesman Vince Crawley (source: The New York Times)

Vince Crawley, a spokesman for the United States Africa Command, said American forces had not bombed Sudan. “The U.S. military has not conducted any airstrikes, fired any missiles or undertaken any combat operations in or around Sudan since October 2008, when U.S. Africa Command formally became responsible for U.S. military action in Africa,” he said.

The American officials who described the Israeli role declined to be identified because they were discussing classified information and were not authorized to speak for the Obama administration. One American military official said the January strike was one of a series of Israeli attacks against arms shipments bound for Gaza.

End excerpt____

If it is true that Iran sent operatives to Sudan to facilitate the smuggling of short-range missiles and sophisticated armor-piercing munitions to Hamas in Gaza, then Sudan’s President Omar Hassan al-Bashir and his regime have a helluva lot more to worry about than an ICC arrest warrant for his war crimes against the people of Darfur.

Why didn’t Sudan’s air force and navy detect and engage (intercept) the squadrons consisting of numerous Israeli fighters and bombers entering Sudan airspace. Was it cowardice (most likely) or did the Sudanese military simply not see these aircraft on their sophisticated new defense radar systems? What about the hundreds of Chinese and Russian military advisors running around the country, they must have seen something? Non? Nichts?

It is no wonder that Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak didn’t bother to share the stage with Sudan’s president and Libya’s leader Muammar el-Qaddafi at the Arab League Summit in Doha (Qatar) this week. Sudan is on the road to perdition under this regime, and so is anyone who is foolish enough to back them, including their ‘brothers-in-arms’ at the Doha Summit.


Related articles and resources

TIME.com (Time Magazine International edition)
How Israel Foiled an Arms Convoy Bound for Hamas 03/30/09

The New York Times
Often Split, Arab Leaders Unite for Sudan’s Chief 03/30/09
U.S. Officials Say Israel Struck in Sudan 03/26/09

The Lede: the New York Times’ news blog
Qaddafi Erupts, on Schedule 03/30/09
Sudan Airstrike Mystery Update 03/27/09

Haaretz.com (Israel)
Sudan says Israel 'most probably' behind attack (text and video) 03/27/09
'Egypt boosts Sudan border troops over Gaza smuggling' 03/27/09
IAF Sudan strike / Olmert: Israel will target threats near and far 03/26/09
ANALYSIS : In bombing Sudan, Israel sends message to Iran by Amos Harel 03/26/09

The Arabist (Cairo, Egypt)
Qadhafi never disappoints (Libya's leader at the Arab Summit in Doha) 03/31/09
The Prince of Hyperbole 03/29/09
ABC News: Three Israeli attacks on Sudan, not just one 03/28/09
Things to remember about the Sudan air strike 03/27/09
Mubarak will not go to Doha Arab summit 03/27/09
On al-Shorouk (interview with the author of The Arabist) 03/27/09
CBS says Israel, not US, behind Sudan strike 03/26/09

Spiegel Online International (Germany)
Al-Bashir Arrest Warrant: Qatari Emir Warns of 'Chaos' in Sudan 03/28/09
Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine interviews the Emir of Qatar re: Sudan’s President al-Bashir and the ICC arrest warrant before the Arab League Summit in Doha

The Washington Post
Sudan Alleges Foreign Airstrikes Near Border With Egypt 03/27/09

The Christian Science Monitor
Will Arab leaders discuss Israeli airstrike in Sudan? 03/29/09

Foreign Policy Magazine
FP Blogs: Mark Lynch – author of the Abu Aardvark Middle East blog
The Doha Summit: A user's guide

The Arab League Summit (Doha, Qatar) – March 30-31, 2009

Technorati tags:Africa Sudan Israel Gaza Hamas weapons US Military AFRICOM USA Egypt global voices Iran Middle East Arab League Doha Summit

US President Obama and the Al Arabiya interview: the Muslim world talks back

The new US administration under President Barack H. Obama has certainly gotten off to a fast start since the inauguration on January 20th. One of the most interesting news stories to develop over the past weeks is the exclusive interview granted by the White House to the Arab news network Al Arabiya. The Al Arabiya TV network is ranked (a distant) Nr. 2 behind the Al Jazeera network amongst Arab and Muslim viewers worldwide.

The Nr. 1 foreign policy challenge that has frustrated many diplomats and world leaders over the past half a century is Der Ewige Krieg (the Forever War) between the Israelis and Palestinians & Co. Many people have watched for decades how presidents, kings, prime ministers and foreign ministers, special envoys and UN bosses, a long and growing list of people that includes some of the best foreign policy minds and diplomats the world has to offer____ all fail in helping these two eternal enemies find a sustainable resolution to their many problems. When US Vice-President Joe Biden made the remark “They’re gonna test this guy…” during the 2008 election campaign, I and many others understood who he meant with ‘they’ and what the greatest foreign policy challenge for the new US administration would be ___ achieving a just and sustainable peace the Middle East. In my opinion it was a very good move that President Barack Obama chose to reach out to the Arab and Muslim world by granting his first TV interview to Al Aribiya.


Extending a hand in peace and pulling back a stub?
A roundup of reactions to President Barack Obama’s words for the Arab and Muslim people of the world

There are a number of good editorials and blog posts commenting on the Al Aribiya interview with President Obama. I’ll start with a blogger roundup of Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) opinions at Global Voices Online (the Berkman Center @ Harvard Law School). In the post titled ‘MENA: Reflections on Obama’s Al Arabiya Interview’ Lasto Adri offers a sample of what bloggers who write about Middle East affairs are saying about the interview:

…But The Arabist [based in Cairo], in his “Obama’s TV appearance” post answered Zeinobia’s and Rob’s concerns pointing [out]:

Very good on the Obama team to have made this move, which was necessary, so quickly.

It repairs some, but only some, of the damage caused by his silence on Gaza.

The choice of Arabiya was most probably a decision to appeal to the Saudis, have Obama underline the importance of their Arab Initiative which has been snubbed by Israel and the US under Bush.

Nonetheless Arabiya is problematic - this is the channel dubbed Hibriya (The Hebrew One) because of its coverage of the Gaza crisis and that generally defends the views of Riyadh, Cairo and other problematic US allies. This confirms that Obama will not, like Bush since 2006, go against Egypt and Saudi on domestic issues and there won’t be a rethink of the US relationship with these. But if you thought that would happen, [then] you’re stupid.

Should Obama have gone to Jazeera instead? Perhaps not, for both domestic reasons (the criticism he would expose himself to, even if unwarranted) and because there are genuine US complaints about Jazeera. But at some later point, he should go to Jazeera - especially if it is to pitch a major conflict resolution initiative in the region. At the end of the day, despite its bias, Arabiya is the number two pan-Arab stations. (In many countries, like the rest of the world, Arabs actually watch their national TV stations most.)

Obama’s next move should be to disband al-Hurra. It’s a useless waste of money.

End excerpt________

These are very interesting viewpoints and of course the feedback from the crew of Cairo-based journalists and other contributors at The Arabist is invaluable. Please read the entire post ‘Obama’s TV Appearance’ at The Arabist.


During the jubilation and excitement described in my previous post about the inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States of America it was evident to me that several Arabs and Muslims in my community did not share in the world’s excitement. Only a select few Muslims that I know personally have expressed to me an understanding of what this change in political leadership means for citizens of the US, The Middle East, Africa and Europe. Of course my personal observation may not mean very much since there are 10’s of thousands of Arabs and Muslims that live in this German city. Conversations amongst Muslims here about the Obama presidency are taking place in private homes, in the workplace, in the shops and Männervereins (men’s social clubs) and on college and university campuses. Like people everywhere the Muslim world is wondering if this dramatic change in American leadership will help bring about a much-needed change in relations between the West and the East.

Not surprisingly most of my older Arab and Muslim friends (guys over 50 years of age) do understand the significance of Obama’s election victory. They have told me how deeply moved they were while watching the inauguration of America’s first African American president on television, and how hopeful they are about the chance for new opportunities and promises of change offered by the new US administration. I am especially proud of this small, tight circle of friends from the Middle East and Europe (I am the only American member). We may fight and argue over geo-politics and global issues and crisis, but at the end of the day we always remain friends and courteous to one another. I reckon that this is quite an accomplishment for a group of old war hawks and former enemies.

I do believe that a majority of Muslims in my community remain very skeptical of President Obama being able to bring about any significant change in the Middle East and I would also say that their views represent the views of average citizens across the Arab/Persian region and throughout the Muslim world. Of course there are some people who will never believe that “Americans are not your enemy.” To accept this statement from a US president as truth would be too much of a shock to their system of values and beliefs. Fortunately (I presume) there are only a few people in my own community who or so lost in their beliefs as to think in this way.

President Obama’s appearance on Al Aribiya surely was one of the most significant interviews of a US political leader directed at the Arab and Muslim world in years. Let’s hope that he and other members of his administration make a regular practice of granting access to journalists working for the press and news media worldwide.


One of the better summaries about the Obama - Al Aribiya interview that I have read was written by Marc Lynch, an associate professor of political science at George Washington University and author of the popular Middle East blog, Abu Aardvark. Marc Lynch wrote the following in his post titled ‘Obama to Arabs: “what you’ll see is someone who is listening”’ published to his new column/blog at ForeignPolicy.com:

It's impossible to exaggerate the symbolic importance of Barack Obama choosing an Arabic satellite television station for his first formal interview as President -- and of taking that opportunity to talk frankly about a new relationship with the Muslim world based on mutual respect and emphasizing listening rather than dictating. His interview promises a genuinely fresh start in the way the United States interacts with the Arab world and a new dedication to public diplomacy.

In his conversation with the estimable Hisham Milhem (a good choice for an interlocutor), Obama reached out directly to the Arab public via the Saudi TV station al-Arabiya (which shrewdly posted the transcript immediately). It signals the importance of the Middle East to the new President, his commitment to engaging on Arab-Israeli peace, his genuinely fresh thinking and new start with the Muslim world, and his recognition of the importance of genuine public diplomacy.

I admit that I'm a little biased here. How can I not be thrilled that Obama has adopted the policy advice I've been offering since the publication of "Taking Arabs Seriously" in Foreign Affairs back in 2003? And in his first interview anywhere, less than a week into job, no less. I have to admit it feels a bit odd to see an administration doing things right after all these years. But that said, credit should go where credit is due. I do think that this is an extremely significant gambit which signals his commitment to real public diplomacy, his engagement with Middle East issues (repudiating all the pundits expecting him to neglect foreign policy), and his ability to speak in a genuinely new way to the Muslim world.

His remarks hit the sweet spot again and again. He repeatedly emphasized his intention of moving past the iron walls of the 'war on terror' and 'clash of civilizations' which so dominated the Bush era. "My job is to communicate to the Muslim world that the United States is not your enemy," Obama said, emphasizing as in his inaugural address that he is "ready to initiate a new partnership [with the Muslim world] based on mutual respect and mutual interest." And where so much of the Bush administration's 'public diplomacy' was about manipulating and lecturing, Obama begins -- as he should -- with listening: "what I told [Mitchell] is start by listening, because all too often the United States starts by dictating..so let's listen."

He clearly understands that this won't be easy, that there are real conflicts and obstacles and enemies. He obviously recognizes that the Gaza crisis and eight years of the Bush administration have left a heavy toll on America's reputation and credibility. He stressed the importance of engaging on Israeli-Arab issues right away, the need for new ideas and approaches, and the interrelationships among the region's issues that I've always seen as the key to his Middle East policy ("I do think that it is impossible for us to think only in terms of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and not think in terms of what's happening with Syria or Iran or Lebanon or Afghanistan and Pakistan. These things are interrelated.")

And above all, he understands that words are only the beginning, and that ultimately deeds and policy will determine Arab views of the United States. Public diplomacy is not about marketing a lousy policy -- it's about engaging honestly, publicly, and directly with foreign publics about those policies, explaining and listening and adjusting where appropriate. Obama gets it...

End Excerpt. Read more at ForeignPolicy.com:
Barack Obama's interview on Al Arabiya by Marc Lynch, 01/27/09


TIME magazine’s veteran Middle East and Africa correspondent Scott Macleod has two very interesting posts up at The Middle East Blog since the Al Arabiya interview. Here is an excerpt from the latest on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s reaction to President Obama’s outstretched hand:

Ahmadinejad to Obama: Get Lost!
TIME - The Middle East Blog - Jan 29, 2009

Has Mahmoud Ahmadinejad slapped the outreached palm of President Barack Obama, who offered a cautious hand of cooperation to the Islamic Republic?

In his inauguration speech on Jan. 20, Obama said:

“To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.”

In his al-Arabiya interview Monday, broadcast throughout the Middle East Tuesday, Obama said:

“I do think that it is important for us to be willing to talk to Iran, to express very clearly where our differences are, but where there are potential avenues for progress. And we will over the next several months be laying out our general framework and approach. And as I said during my inauguration speech, if countries like Iran are willing to unclench their fist, they will find an extended hand from us.”

In a speech in Kermanshah on Wednesday, Iranian President Ahmadinejad gave Obama his reply:

“We welcome change provided the change is fundamental and in the right direction. If you talk of change in policies, withdraw your forces from Afghanistan. If you say change in policies, then halt your support to the uncultivated and rootless, forged, phony, killers of women and children Zionists and allow the Palestinian nation to determine its own destiny.”

Ahmadinejad went on to demand that Americans "apologize” to Iranians and compensate them for the “murderous crimes” the U.S. has committed against Iran. He specifically referred to the CIA-backed overthrow of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953, U.S. support of Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war between 1980-1988 and the downing of an Iranian civilian plane and killing of 290 passengers by a U.S. warship in 1988.

Ahmadinejad's aggressive tone was markedly different from the friendly letter of congratulations that Ahmadinejad sent immediately after Obama's election Nov. 4:

“I would like to offer my congratulations on your election by the majority of the American electorate. I hope you will be able to take fullest advantage of the opportunity to serve and leave behind a positive legacy by putting the real interest of people as well as equity and justice ahead and above the insatiable demands of a selfish and unworthy minority.”

What's going on with Ahmadinejad? Three things.
Read more at TIME.com – The Middle East Blog


Factoid: President Obama’s debut was not the first time a US president or high-ranking US government official was interviewed by Al Arabiya News, so don’t get too excited back home. I believe that former US President George W. Bush appeared several times on the Al Arabiya network, and so did other key members of his administration over the past 8 years.

The Al Arabiya Washington Bureau Chief, Hisham Melham, interviewed former US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice on May 7, 2007 and this was just one of several appearances by Condoleeza Rice on the news channel. Whether the interview was broadcast/cablecast to US audiences is another thing altogether. Here is a link to the full transcript of the Condoleeza Rice interview: ‘US Secretary of State Rice Interview with Hisham Melham of Al Arabiya. It would be interesting to compare what Dr. Rice said vs. the recent interview with President Obama.

Special Note: I was surprised (shocked) to learn from an article I read at the New York Times last month that the Al Jazeera-English news channel is NOT available to American broadcast and cable TV audiences. According to the NY Times article it is because cable TV networks and programming distributors are either afraid or are unwilling to offer the popular Arab TV network’s programming to their customers.

“My fellow Americans,” to not be able to view the leading Arab 24 hour news channel is bordering on an infringement of your rights to free speech and unfettered access to information. After all, the broadcast headquarters of the network is based in the capital city of one of America’s closest allies in the Middle East (Qatar), so where is the problem? Throughout most of Europe, the Middle East, Asia and Africa millions of people can zap between CNN International, BBC World, and Al Jazeera (English) in order to get a better ‘world view’ of international TV news and special in-depth reports and features. I would hope that this situation changes for American TV markets and audiences sometime soon, the sooner the better.

Below is a list of articles and editorials that I think may be helpful to my readers in gaining a better understanding of where US policies for the Middle East may be headed under the leadership of President Obama and his new foreign policy and national security team.


Related articles, op-eds and resources

Al Arabiya News Network – English version (Dubai)
Obama reaches Arabs, Muslims via Al Arabiya
Note: article describes how the Arab satellite news network landed the interview and its impact upon Al Aribiya’s international viewing audience
Obama tells Al Arabiya peace talks should resume
Note: article includes a link to the full text transcript of the interview

TIME.com
The Middle East Blog - Ahmadinejad to Obama: Get Lost!
The Middle East Blog - Aaron David Miller: A Reality Check
Mitchell is Ready to Listen, But is Israel?
Obama Mideast Watch: The Al-Arabiya Interview by Scott Macleod
How Al-Arabiya Got the Obama Interview by Scott Macleod
Tearing Down The Walls by Scott Macleod
Note: a good backgrounder about the emergence of independent news media in the Arab world with a focus on the Arab news network al-Jazeera (see Aljazeera.com)

The New York Times
Obama Tells Arab World U.S. Will ‘Start by Listening’ - The Lede Blog
On Arab TV Network, Obama Urges Dialogue
Few in U.S. See Jazeera’s Coverage of Gaza War - NYTimes.com
Al Jazeera News - The New York Times Topics

Beet.TV – The root to the media revolution
Al Jazeera Finds Growing Audience for Online Video Clips with Conflict in Gaza, AP Reports

CNN International
'Americans are not your enemy,' Obama tells Muslims - CNN.com
Dateline Davos: Obama’s World with host Christiane Amanpour
Note: guests include Raila Odinga (Kenyan Prime Minister), Bernard Kouchner (French Foreign Minister), Hoshyar Zebari (Iraqi Foreign Minister), Mohammed Elbaradei (IEAE Director-General), Manouchehr Mottaki (Iranian Foreign Minister), Abdul Rahim Wardak (Afghanistan Defense Minister)
Inside the Middle East with Hala Gorani - “The Middle East Challenge”

Washington Post/Newsweek - PostGlobal: A Conversation about Global Issues with David Ignatius and Fareed Zakaria
Articles by Hisham Melham at PostGlobal

Spiegel Online International (English website of Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine)
The World from Berlin: Obama's Open Hand to Muslims
Note: above article includes a roundup of how the German press responded to the US president’s interview on Al Arabiya

Foreign Policy Magazine and FP Passport blog
Obama to Arabs: “what you’ll see is someone who is listening”
Barack Obama's interview on Al Arabiya by Marc Lynch
Note: Mark Lynch is an associate professor of political science at George Washington University and author of the popular Abu Aardvark blog
Obama's al-Arabiya interview by Joshua Keating
Note: above post at FP Passport features the Al Arabiya interview video on YouTube
Morning Brief: Obama begins Middle East outreach FP Passport
Barack Obama's secret dinner with Samantha Power, Lee Hamilton, and Indra Nooyi by Laura Rozen

The Council on Foreign Relations
Mitchell's Prospects for Lasting Israeli-Palestinian Accord 'Slim to None' by Bernard Gwertzman - Interview with former top US Middle East negotiator Aaron David Miller
From CFR and Saban Center at Brookings - A Mideast Policy for the Obama Administration, 12/02/08
Crisis Guide: The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (an extensive background guide)
Foreign Affairs magazine - Taking Arabs Seriously by Marc Lynch (Sep/Oct 2003)

The Heritage Foundation
Al-Hurrah Television and Lessons for U.S. Public Diplomacy by Helle C. Dale, 11/18/05

The Daily Kos
Reaction to Obama’s al-Aribiya Interview by John Campanelli

Real Clear Politics
Dancing Among Landmines--The Obama Al-Arabiya Interview by Victor Davis Hanson

Global Voices Online
MENA: Reflections on Obama’s Al Arabiya Interview by Lasto Adri
Note: an excellent roundup of opinions about the Al Aribiya interview from bloggers in the Middle East and North Africa and the USA

Kabobfest (a popular blog on Middle East affairs authored by an Arab-American)
President Obama's first formal interview - with Al Arabiya?

The Palestine Center (an independent Washington DC-based think tank)
Al-Arabiya: President Obama Interview & Highlights
From Gaza to Obama: What Next for the Middle East? by Ali Abunimah
Al-Jazeera interview with leading Arab-American scholars and activists on the eve of the US Presidential Inauguration, 01/16/09
The Palestine Center official blog

Aljazeera-English @ YouTube
Arab Americans Look to Obama, 01/15/09Note: the above video features former CNN International anchor Shihab Rattansi speaking with Dr. James J. Zogby (Arab American Institute), Maya M. Berry (The MidAmr Group), and Amjad Attallah (New America Foundation)

Technorati tags: USA Middle East Palestine Israel Gaza Hamas Iran Barack Obama Obama politics global voices

The Slavery Essays - Part I: U.K.'s 200th anniversary of the abolition of the Slave Trade Act 1807

The Slave Market by Gustave Boulanger ca. 1888

The Introduction

I always find it difficult to talk or write about slavery in the New World and the Atlantic World as it has such a powerful legacy in my own country, the United States of America, as well as the whole of the Americas (North and South), and of course my own family. There have been so many myths and lies and half-truths regarding the enslavement of black Africans in the former European colonies of the Americas that it is no wonder that many Americans (North and South) and Europeans and the rest of the world spend their whole lives in ignorance and denial about the grim legacy of the transatlantic slave trade and the impact it has had on all of our respective societies.

I welcome the effort being made by the U.K. to commemorate the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the Slave Trade Act (1807) as it helps to bring out into the open a public discussion and recognition of the role that various people and entities played in this most despicable of human endeavors AND the commemoration helps to remind us all that the legacy of slavery is still with us in so many ways today, especially when you stop to think that there are more people enslaved today in 2007 than has ever been in human history. In other words, we all have a burden of great shame to bear in regards to the subject of slavery, one of the most ancient and enduring atrocities in the human experience and world history.

So, hats off to U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair and many others in the U.K. who have put such a great effort into making this 200 anniversary commemoration a memorable event for many of us and to use it as a Call to Action for people everywhere to become more engaged in helping to end modern-day slavery.

One thing that our team project on the history of blacks and Africans in Europe has helped me to understand is that one cannot go through life using tragic events caused by the acts of contemptible personalities in history like a blunt weapon to bludgeon one’s so-called enemies into submission or death. People are going to believe what is comfortable for them to believe and ignore and deny everything else, no matter how much truth another opinion or indisputable factual evidence you present, everything else will be rejected___ oft times violently rejected as we clearly see everyday on our televisions and read about in the press. History, religion, literature, and the media (news, entertainment) has been so abused and misused by people seeking power over others down through the ages to grossly mislead people and pit one idiot group against another that it is absolutely awful.

Slavery and abolition played a pivotal role in the history of my home, Saint Louis, Missouri and the surrounding tri-State region (Kansas, Illinois, Iowa: see Bleeding Kansas era before the American Civil War). Slavery not only affected black Africans but also the indigenous tribes of the region (also see Mississippian culture and Cahokia) and the European settlers who entered this frontier around 1699 in search of land and gold and animal furs; escaping the misery that they had left behind in Europe. If my African-American ancestors who had arrived at the confluence of the great Mississippi and Missouri rivers in 1790 had decided to crossover to the Missouri side and settle in the bustling frontier outposts of what would later become Saint Louis, they probably would have lost their hard won freedom. I presume that they were freed from bondage shortly before or after the American Revolutionary War with England, 1775-1783.

Note: Although the early history of European presence in the area starts with the expeditions of Louis Joliet and Jacques Marquette (1673), the first settlement at what is today Saint Louis, MO. didn’t begin until almost 100 years later with the arrival of Pierre Laclède and his 13-year old stepson René Auguste Chouteau and a group of 30 men in 1763. These territories were actually controlled by the Spanish royal court (a particularly brutal and murderous government for black African slaves in the colonies) but after the end of the French - Indian War (1754-1763) and the 1763 Treaty of Paris that gave all lands east of the Mississippi river to England the small settlement of Saint Louis began to grow rapidly. By the time my early American ancestors showed up in the area the settlement of St. Louis had grown to the enormous size of approximately 1000 people. Massive!

Napoléan Bonaparte, who worked out a deal with President Thomas Jefferson and the U.S. government administration of 1801 to purchase the vast Louisiana Territory had re-introduced black slavery into the French colonies and territories in 1803. For more on the history of St. Louis click here and here ( also see: history and heritage of Missouri including St. Louis).

As a young man growing up in St. Louis, Missouri I had the privilege to know and be close friends with an old southern couple, Mr. and Mrs. Wofford, who hailed from the great State of Mississippi. Mr. Wofford had worked as a black sharecropper (a farmer without land) in rural Mississippi if I remember correctly, and he and his wife would spend hours talking with their lovely grand daughter and me about life in the early 20th Century rural South. We affectionately addressed them as “Big Mama” and “Big Papa”, an expression used by many people of the southern United States of that time to describe a grandparent. Big Mama was a very pretty petite woman and Big Papa was a strapping, strong man of about six feet (1.85 meters) in height.

I can clearly picture Big Mama rocking back and forth in her favorite chair on their front porch (veranda) during a warm summer evening while enjoying a chew of tobacco or pinch of snuff discreetly lodged in her cheek explaining to us “citified youngsters” what slavery and post-Civil War America was like for black folks and white folks alike. She recalled stories that had been handed down to them from their own grandparents and relatives and older friends, many who had labored the great majority of their lives as slaves in America’s Deep South. I learned everything I needed to know about “slavery and forgiveness” from these two beautiful people who helped to shape my own life in such a powerful way. Of course I have learned even more about the horrible institution of human slavery since my youth, and although I have been able to improve and expand my knowledge on Big Mama’s lessons about slavery, I struggle to this very day with the “forgiveness” part. Can’t do it, forgive whom? They all dead, those who dunnit, aren’t they? Non?

So, I’ve come up with a few brief essays for the 200th Anniversary of the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act in the U.K. and I am dedicating this humble effort to the memory of Mr. and Mrs. Wofford, who have both passed away from us. Big Mama would be tinkled pink that the British are struggling to come to terms with this terrible legacy in their history, and I can imagine that she would be mighty proud that her “adopted grandson” would speak out with a message from the Colonies. Big Mama’s own message for the citizens of the United Kingdom and the world would be quite simple and to the point:

“Look into the mirror of your history and face up to the Truth, then get on with your lives and make sure you don’t behave as bad as those lost souls who came before you.”

The “Jewels in the Jungle” Essay on Slavery – Part I

It has not escaped my attention while researching information necessary to compose the articles and posts for our Black History in Europe project that slavery has played a key role in the lives of Africans and Europeans alike for hundreds of years. Dr. Kate Lowe, co-editor with T.F. Earle of Black Africans in Renaissance Europe (Cambridge, 2005) has eloquently written about the complexity of problems surrounding this sad legacy of European history in the introduction to her book. There were many, many people involved from several nations, races and religions. Attempting to place blame on any one race of people or nation would be a terrible mistake in my opinion and an injustice to all the people who have suffered under the misery of human enslavement down through the ages. This scourge of human suffering has been with us for several millennia and practically all human beings have been affected by slavery in some way or another. Slavery is not a black & white thing and it never was… it has affected humans on the Earth from the time that our first ancestors raided neighboring villages in war and conflict and enslaved the survivors who were probably women and children. We are talking about 10’s of thousands of years ago (see National Geographic magazine’s special feature The Human Journey, Human Origins March 2006 issue). Slavery has been around for a very long time!

The glorious empires of the Antiquity, those of the Eastern world and the Middle East, of Africa (Nubia and Kush, Egypt, Ethiopia and the Land of Punt, Mali and the kingdoms of the Sahel, the Kingdom of Kongo, Great Zimbabwe), the Western world with the Greek and Roman empires and the ancient peoples of the Americas, all of these great periods in human history were overshadowed by the brutal and inhuman practice of slavery.

That’s why it was so strange for me to see in a BBC News article a photo of U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair apologizing to the President of Ghana, John Kufuor, for Britain’s role in the transatlantic slave trade. That’s why it was so confusing to hear the newly elected Archbishop of York, Dr. John Sentamu, himself an African by birth, demanding that the U.K. Government make a clear and formal apology for slavery. Should it not be that the governments of Ghana, Nigeria, Benin, Niger, Mali, Congo, Tanzania, Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania, Libya, Egypt, Sudan, and many other African nations also be making an apology to the descendents of the transatlantic and the trans-Sahara and trans-Sahel and Indian Ocean and Arab slave trades? I mean let’s make this an equal opportunity deal here and not leave any nation out that was deeply, deeply involved.

The Ashanti kings of the Gold Coast of West Africa and kings and rulers of several African countries (Saharan and sub-Saharan) did not stop the wicked trade of human beings for sale to Europeans and Arabs until the beginning of the 20th Century. Hell, the trade in slaves from Africa has never stopped and continues right up to this very day! So let’s lighten up on demands for apologies because the way I see it, everybody is guilty in some way or another. If you need an apology from someone, go look into the mirror and pray, “Lord, I sure am sorry for (conciously or unconsciously) supporting and/or ignoring modern-day slavery”.

I know that some folks reading this will feel insulted and that’s fine. Be insulted. You should be insulted especially if you can’t accept that the few facts listed below are just the “tip of the iceberg” in regards to Africa’s own involvement in the peculiar institution of human slavery

Source: The Story of Africa – Slavery - BBC World Service website and radio program. A history of the continent from an African perspective (authored by African writers and historians).

Growing Rich with Slavery

Royalty

In the early 18th century, Kings of Dahomey (known today as Benin) became big players in the slave trade, waging a bitter war on their neighbours, resulting in the capture of 10,000 [slaves], including another important slave trader, the King of Whydah. King Tegbesu made £250,000 a year selling people into slavery in 1750. King Gezo said in the 1840's he would do anything the British wanted him to do apart from giving up slave trade:

"The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and the glory of their wealth…the mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to slavery…"

LIVING WITNESS
Some of the descendants of African traders are alive today. Mohammed Ibrahim Babatu is the great great grandson of Baba-ato (also known as Babatu), the famous Muslim slave trader, who was born in Niger and conducted his slave raids in Northern Ghana in the 1880's. Mohammed Ibrahim Babatu, the deputy head teacher of a Junior secondary school in Yendi, lives in Ghana.

"In our curriculum, we teach a little part of the history of our land. Because some of the children ask questions about the past history of our grandfather Babatu.

Babatu, and others, didn't see anything wrong with slavery. They didn't have any knowledge of what the people were used for. They were only aware that some of the slaves would serve others of the royal families within the sub-region.

He has done a great deal of harm to the people of Africa. I have studied history and I know the effect of slavery.

I have seen that the slave raids did harm to Africa, but some members of our family feel he was ignorant…we feel that what he did was fine, because it has given the family a great fame within the Dagomba society.

He gave some of the slaves to the Dagombas and then he sent the rest of the slaves to the Salaga market. He didn't know they were going to plantations…he was ignorant…"

SONGHAY
The young Moroccan traveler and commentator, Leo Africanus, was amazed at the wealth and quantity of slaves to be found in Gao, the capital of Songhay [Songhay empire], which he visited in 1510 and 1513 when the empire was at the height of its power under Askiya Mohammed.

"...here there is a certain place where slaves are sold, especially on those days when the merchants are assembled. And a young slave of fifteen years of age is sold for six ducats, and children are also sold. The king of this region has a certain private palace where he maintains a great number of concubines and slaves."

SWAHILI
The ruling class of coastal Swahili society - Sultans, government officials and wealthy merchants - used non-Muslim slaves as domestic servants and to work on farms and estates. The craftsmen, artisans and clerks tended to be Muslim and freed men. But the divisions between the different classes were often very flexible. The powerful slave and ivory trader Tippu Tip was the grandson of a slave.

The Omani Sultan, Seyyid Said, became immensely rich when he started up cloves plantations in 1820 with slave labour - so successful was he that he moved the Omani capital to Zanzibar in 1840.

Note: see additional information about the Omani African slave trade on Zanzibar below

PUNISHED FOR KEEPING SLAVES
The Asanti (the capital, Kumasi, is in modern Ghana) had a long tradition of domestic slavery. But gold was the main commodity for selling. With the arrival of Europeans the slaves displaced gold as the main commodity for trade. As late as 1895 the British Colonial Office was not concerned by this.

"It would be a mistake to frighten the King of Kumasi and the Ashantis generally on the question of slavery. We cannot sweep away their customs and institutions all at once. Domestic slavery should not be troubled at present."

British attitudes changed when the King of the Asanti (the Asantehene) resisted British colonial authority. The suppression of the slave trade became a justification for the extension of European power. With the humiliation and exile of King Prempeh I in 1896, the Asanti were placed under the authority of the Governor of the Gold Coast and forced therefore to conform to British law and abolish the slave trade.

SLAVERY DECREED BY THE GODS
In 1807, Britain declared all slave trading illegal. The king of Bonny (in what is now the Nigerian delta) was dismayed at the conclusion of the practice.

"We think this trade must go on. That is the verdict of our oracle and the priests. They say that your country, however great, can never stop a trade ordained by God himself."

End of BBC World Service Story of Africa excerpt

Source: HMS Surprise – documents and diary of the 19th Century British Royal Navy surgeon William Loney by Peter Davies

Excerpts from the Frere Mission to Zanzibar (1872)

Early history of Zanzibar

Round 1500 Portugal gained control of Zanzibar and most of the East African coast. In 1698 Arabs from Oman ousted the Portuguese. In 1792 Britain signed a treaty with the Sultan of Muscat providing British protection for Zanzibar in exchange for Omani support against any French thrust via Oman towards India. So started a gradual British involvement in Zanzibar affairs.

The Omani arabs only started to take a serious interest in Zanzibar, when Sayyid ("Lord") Said, Sultan of Muscat since 1804 (family tree), encouraged merchants to trade with, or move to, the island, and to expand into mainland Africa. In 1840 he moved his capital from Muscat to Zanzibar, where he presided over a flourishing trading empire….

The Zanzibar slave trade

The slave trade from Zanzibar had started soon after the Arab conquest, initially for the date plantations in Arabia. Although slaves were also supplied to Persian and India, it was the establishment of sugar and clove plantations in Mauritius and Reunion in the 18th century which led to the greatest development of the trade.

In 1811, just four years after Britain had abolished slavery, Said opened the Great Slave Market in Zanzibar; a year later he introduced cloves to the island, generating a significant need for slaves on the island itself. In 1822, the Sultan's dependence on British naval strength allowed Governor Sir Robert Townsend Farquhar of Mauritius (which under French rule had been a primary destination of slavers from Zanzibar) to send Captain Fairfax Moresby, senior officer at that island, in the Menai to conclude a treaty limiting the slave traffic to the Sultans own (East African and Arabic) dominions, and forbidding any trade of slaves to Christians. A later treaty, effective from 1847, and negotiated in 1845 by Colonel Atkins Hammerton (appointed as the first British Consul at Zanzibar in 1841) further limited - in theory - the traffic from Zanzibar to the Sultan's African dominions between Lamu in the north and Kilwa in the south.

Prevention of incursion by other European powers was the initial reason for a British naval presence on the East African coast. To this were later added protection of British traders, and suppression of the slave trade. This last factor only became prominent round 1860, when the Foreign Office requesting a ship permanently on the station for that purpose. Lack of knowledge about the trade, and a desire not to offend Britain's ally, the Sultan, were responsible for the later development of the anti-slavery issue on the East coast than on the West coast. The explorations of David Livingstone, Richard Burton and John Speke increased the interest of the British public in the area.

The small number of British cruisers on the station, and the fact that large numbers of comparatively small dhows were involved in the slave trade, meant that much of the navy's patrol work had to be done in ships boats, often working independently for days on end.

Poor communications with home, and lack of explicit instructions from the Admiralty, meant that the ship's commanders had to decide how to proceed in individual cases; destruction of captured dhows on the spot was often considered to be the only viable alternative. Protest against this procedure led in 1869 to the giving of full powers of adjudication to the Vice-Admiralty Court at Zanzibar (established in 1866, then only for slavers captured within the Sultans dominions), to which all captures had then to be taken, and to "clarification" of the general instructions to the commanders on the station (often irrelevant, being based on those for the West African station), which in fact only made them more unclear. These aspects, together with the small number of ships on the station (generally not more than two; see for example Cumming's report for 1872) meant that the navy's impact on the slave trade was minimal.

End excerpts from the HMS Surprise – Frere Mission to Zanzibar

My good friend Reza, an Iranian exile who has lived here in Germany for almost 30 years and I have been discussing this Black History in Europe project for weeks now with great fervor and interest and excitement. Reza often reminds me as he describes the ancient history of his own beloved country Iran that it was the famous Persian king Cyrus II (ca. 576-530 BC) of the Achaemenid Empire (559– 330 BC) that first forbid slavery in his empire, making him one of the first slavery abolitionists in history.

I can hear my friend Reza now as I write this article, “Kurush (Cyrus), my King, said to all of the people of ancient Persia:
“In my land there will be no slavery, slavery is verboten! All people are welcome in my kingdom. All religions are welcome in my kingdom, for I am Kurush the Great, the king of kings.””

An excerpt from Wikipedia about Cyrus II (Cyrus the Great):

During his reign, Cyrus maintained control over a vast region of conquered kingdoms, achieved partly through retaining and expanding Median satrapies. Further organization of newly conquered territories into provinces ruled by vassal kings called satraps, was continued by Cyrus' successor Darius the Great. Cyrus' empire demanded only tribute and conscripts from many parts of the realm.

Cyrus' conquests began a new era in the age of empire building, where a vast superstate, comprising many dozens of countries, races, religions, and languages, were ruled under a single administration headed by a central government. This system lasted for centuries, and was retained both by the invading Seleucid dynasty during their control of Persia, and later Iranian dynasties including the Persian Parthians and Sassanids.

In 1992, he was ranked #87 on Michael H. Hart's list of the most influential figures in history. On December 10, 2003, in her acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize, Shirin Ebadi evoked Cyrus, saying:

I am an Iranian, a descendant of Cyrus the Great. This emperor proclaimed at the pinnacle of power 2,500 years ago that he 'would not reign over the people if they did not wish it.' He promised not to force any person to change his religion and faith and guaranteed freedom for all. The Charter of Cyrus the Great should be studied in the history of human rights.

End excerpts from Wikipedia on Cyrus the Great

The Slavery Essays - Part II coming soon


Technorati tags: Africa America Europe U.K. U.S.A. Iran History World History African History American History European History Slavery Abolition Freedom civil rights human rights Global Voices