The Copenhagen climate conference was one of the most important events whose outcome will affect each and every state worldwide. The editorial of the United Arab Emirates daily Al-Bayan said the conference was held in an atmosphere of caution and fear that it would fail to come up with effective and quick solutions to global warming. In order to deal with the problem, especially on the part of countries that caused it, the edit outlined a few conditions, namely approaching the problem in a different way. The big guns should listen to the scientists' warning and respond to natural phenomena that emphasise the danger of warming like icebergs melting in the north and south poles. Scientists underlined that the world has five to 10 years to reduce emissions. The second condition is that the developed countries should take quick measures to reduce the harmful effects of emitting warm gases and help the developing countries in finding a source of energy less harmful on the environment. The UN said that we need $10 billion now and a similar amount in 2011 and 2012 to control global warming. In addition, the world has to spend billions of dollars during the coming decade for the same end. "The money involved is the main factor before reaching an accord. However, the risk is bigger because the emitting gases could burn Earth," the edit said. The editorial of the Saudi daily Al-Riyadh regarded the conference as the biggest world event because of the presence of 192 states and some 34,000 members and journalists. However, the importance of the conference is not in the high attendance or in the fact that it represents a crossroads between complete environmental havoc and a change in the policies of industrial countries, but in the results that it would produce. Member states should agree on a solution to global warming so that Third World countries would not be left to pay the price and become victims of pollution and poverty. The edit acknowledged that big companies pressure governments for financial reasons, but the magnitude of the crisis, if they do not take any action, would be bigger than any revenue. "Experts or at least the optimistic of them, say it is not too late to deal with global warming. But it is not possible for any state to avoid taking part as long as we all share the same space." The Lebanese daily Al-Anwaar focussed on the effects of global warming on Lebanon. Its editorial criticised politicians for focussing on issues like the Copenhagen summit, the Iranian nuclear file and US troops in Afghanistan but cannot find a solution to minor local issues like the fishing season, roads and pollution. "The new minister of the environment followed the developments in Copenhagen from his office. He did not bother to see for himself the encroachment on the Lebanese environment," the edit read. The angry and surprised reaction to the results of the Swiss referendum banning minarets is still reverberating in the Arab world. Samir Qatami was not surprised by the result or by the measures taken by some European states to ban the hijab or headscarf and the niqab, the full veil, because the writer felt during his recent visits to Europe that there was a general trend among wide-ranging sectors against Islamic culture, slogans and symbols especially after 9/11 and terrorist operations carried out by Islamic extremists against European states after that. Although the European communities are secularists, these incidents were used by the media to incite European peoples against Islam and Muslims. Thus, Qatami questioned how as Muslims we could deal with such a situation: by boycotting Switzerland and other European states, or by persuading Europeans that Islam is a religion that calls for peace and love. He called for using wise and convincing language in talking with Europe and refraining from using threatening language as that would harm the picture of Islam even more. This is the task of Arab missions in Europe, the Arab and Islamic governments, the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Conference. And they have to carry it out before it is too late, Qatami summed up in the Jordanian political daily Al-Rai. Khaled Al-Haroub adopted an analytical approach at two levels when he looked at the referendum: modern European concepts and values regarding multi-cultural and multi- religious issues, and the Arab and Islamic approach to other religions. The results of the referendum fully contradict with the values of tolerance and accepting the other as claimed in Europe. It also contradicts enlightened secularist values that do not take part with or against any religion. But, Al-Haroub pointed out that the Swiss government together with human right activists in Europe rejected that radical rightist stand and showed this rejection by referring the issue to the European court. Al-Haroub found the outcome bitter because the result of the referendum conforms to the approach of most, if not all, Arab states to other religions. "In Switzerland, a rightist group was behind the campaign to ban building minarets, while the government was against the ban. But in many Arab and especially Gulf states, the government would top the list of parties opposing building a church or a synagogue. Thus, any referendum held in these countries would result in landslide opposition to building a church or a synagogue," Al-Haroub wrote in the independent Palestinian political daily Al-Ayyam. However, Al-Haroub pointed to something far more important than the minarets issue: the Swedish document calling for acknowledging East Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state. Sweden presented the paper to the European Union for discussion. Al-Haroub wondered how the document, which caused widespread anger among the Israelis, was ignored by the Arabs. Al-Haroub was not the only writer who pointed to that document. Sultan Al-Hattab hailed Sweden for taking that stand and presenting a document that would revive the hope for establishing a Palestinian state and show the whole world that the Israeli practices in East Jerusalem especially settlement building is illegal. "Mentioning East Jerusalem, in a European document, as the capital of a Palestinian state is a positive step that should be supported. But who should do this? Where are the Arab states? Where are their diplomatic efforts to bring the document to light?" Al-Hattab asked in Al-Rai. He predicted that even France and Italy, who are close to the Arabs, might withdraw their support for the document if they witness Arab reluctance to back it. The editorial of the London-based independent political daily Al-Quds Al-Arabi said the Israeli government had put much pressure on European states to thwart the draft Swedish document, and had managed this to a great extent by amendments suggested by France, Germany, Italy and the Czech Republic. While the edit expected the Israeli pressure, it expressed surprise by the French stand which showed complete support for Israel. The European Union which committed itself to the two-state solution, should have put pressure on Israel and its radical rightist government rather than bow to Israeli pressure. "Bowing to the pressure of a radical rightist Israeli government accused of committing war crimes would give further evidence to the futility of the peace process and jeopardise the security of European states," the edit read.
