Dina Ezzat relays "the Arab message to Frankfurt" The official Arab pavilion seminars at the International Frankfurt Book Fair this year conveyed a clear message of anger with Western policies on the Middle East. Arabs concentrated on the Arab-Israeli conflict and the reform agendas imposed by the West. In a string of confrontational encounters, Arab and Western intellectuals debated a wide range of topics with an emphasis on the political and the socio-economic. Joining the panels in some of these were Germans and some Europeans. Debates were explicit, often heavily loaded. Arab panellists levelled direct accusations at the West's increasingly heavy-handed intervention in the internal affairs of Arab countries, openly pointing a finger at the US to identify it as the principal source of instability in the region and criticising Washington for trying to impose "prefabricated modes of reform". Accusations were likewise directed at Europe -- and, for that matter, key and influential European countries such as Germany and France -- for failing to contribute meaningfully to building a balanced, objective view of the Arab world. German as well as Arab panellists also blamed the West for current, deliberately distorted images of Islam and Arab societies -- which are seen as wholly despotic and irreversibly patriarchal. Nor were German panellists short of ammunition. They spoke openly against the failure of Arab regimes to establish values of democracy and human rights in their countries. They criticised these regimes' tolerating groups that use Islam as an excuse for promoting hatred of the West. And they critiqued Muslim communities in Europe for failing to integrate. Though by and large objective and rational, such cross-cultural sparring was so intense at times it verged on vindictiveness -- during the confrontation regarding the reality of Arab-Muslim women's rights, for example. Starting Monday, Egyptian writer Anis Mansour, who took part in the seminars, employed his daily column on the back page of Al-Ahram as a series of assaults on the aggressive style adopted by Western panellists. Mansour was particularly angered by a German co-panellist's discourse on Arab-Western strife. "I spoke first and I exercised objectivity... Then when it was the turn of the German journalist, who speaks fluent Arabic and Hebrew and who has lived in the Middle East... he deliberately insulted Arabs, especially Egyptians." The panellist's apologies, blaming the alleged misunderstanding on "poor translation", did not convince Mansour, whose experience seems to have been negative. That said, many of 20 or seminars held in the Arab pavilion on post-11 September Arab-Western relations were civilised, constructive affairs. One of the most widely attended by both Arabs and Germans concerned the image of Islam in the world today. During the question- and-answer part of the seminar, neither the prominent Egyptian intellectual Ahmed Kamal Abul-Magd nor his German counterpart gave in to the incendiary urge. There were, rather, considered arguments and counter-arguments about Islam as a form of tolerance and understanding as opposed to Islam as a form of violence and isolationism, as well as the impact this religion has made on social- economic as well as political values in Arab society. Islam was the subject of yet another civilised debate in the seminar on Muslims in Europe -- currently one of the hottest topics on the continent -- discussed with particular reference to Germany. Once again the debate involved coarse accusations on the part of participants who clearly saw Muslims as a threat to the value systems of European societies, and others who believed European countries discriminated against Muslims. All conceded that 11 September dealt a serious blow to the image of Arabs and Muslims everywhere, with representatives of Muslim communities in Europe expressing willingness to embrace the values of their surrogate societies while giving up some of the allegedly arcane values they brought from their mostly Arab countries of origin. Confrontations notwithstanding, there were moments of self-criticism as well; many on the Arab, if few on the Western, side. Some Western panellists courageously admitted that Western societies have all too readily accepted stereotypes that portray Arabs and Muslims as intrinsically violent and aggressive. Others spoke of the failure of the West, and particularly Europe, to contribute to resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict. The war in Iraq was recognised by some Western panellists as an added reason for increased tensions surrounding Arab- Western relations. Arabs showed at least as much courage in criticising themselves, on the other hand. Panellists were willing to critique the failure of Arab regimes to separate religion from politics. Some went so far as to accuse their own regimes of exploiting religion as a means to servicing political agendas. The state of women's rights in Arab societies was likewise subject to harsh criticism on the part of Arab panellists, both those who live both in and away from the Arab world. Many spoke openly of Arab family codes as well as civil laws designed to discriminate against women. "Arab societies in a changing world" was the seminar that showed perhaps the greatest amount of self-criticism on the part of Arab intellectuals. Mostafa El- Fiqqi of Egypt spoke of the need to ration discourse on politics and religion and that on power and money, which are generally delivered, he contended, in higher than the recommended dose. Halim Barakat of Syria criticised Arabs for their inability to live up to the challenges of globalism -- substituting the term "global village" with "global pillage". Mohssenin Barakat of the United Arab Emirates thought Arabs did not pay enough attention to women's issues, while Fahima Charfeddin of Lebanon took issue with "all Arab societies for defending the coercion of women as an Arab value when it really isn't". And Ahmed Beidoun of Lebanon bemoaned the absence of democracy and human rights. The German press thought the seminar demonstrated an Arab capacity for serious self-criticism -- and desire to develop not only an economically sound society but a socially and politically sound one. Yet Western presence in this important seminar was limited to a disappointing degree. Such was not true of those seminars reflecting the depth and breadth of the modern Arab intellectual movement, on the other hand. In an article published in the United Arab Emirates daily Al-Ittihad, Egyptian thinker Mohamed Selim El- Awwa hailed the Arab pavilion seminars in triumphant terms: "Over 90 per cent of all participants in the five seminars in which I took part were not Arab. Some of those participants had to sit on the floor or to stand still for over two hours to follow the proceedings." In fact, according to El- Awwa, German Foreign Minister Joscheka Fischer stood throughout the first part of a seminar discussing the dialogue of civilisations before someone provided him with a seat. Organisational hiccups notwithstanding, he insists, the Arab pavilion seminars managed to communicate the Arab message to the fair's European audience -- with unexpected success.
