A Blog by the Editor of The Middle East Journal

Putting Middle Eastern Events in Cultural and Historical Context

Wednesday, June 18, 2014

Sisi and His Cabinet: A Quick Take

Sisi swore in his first Cabinet today, mostly the old one; of the changes former Ambassador to the US Sameh Shoukri replacing Nabil Fahmy (also a longtime envoy to Washington) as Foreign Minister is the biggest news, which I'll analyze separately. A fuller analysis for now, here.

Just some quick comments, not a drill-down analysis: Sisi kept Ibrehim Mehleb (to Sisi's right, viewer's left), and most of his Cabinet. As I have noted, Mehleb is as fallul as they come. To Sisi's left, in the only uniform, is Defense Minister Sidqi Subhi, a longtime ally of Sisi's. To his left is Interior Minister Muhammad Ibrahim. Note that both he and Sisi are standing at military attention despite business suits: they are the invisible uniforms in the picture.

Four women: not bad in the Arab world. Only one in  hijab, and she in a stylish, colorful one. One cleric in clerical garb for religious affairs.

That Proposed Angelina Jolie as Gertrude Bell Movie Could Be Timely Right About Now . . .

Back in 2011 I noted that Angelina Jolie not only wanted to produce a film about Gertrude Bell, but also wanted to play the role herself. I'm all for a film about Gertrude Bell, which would be wildly timely since she pretty much cobbled Iraq together, but at the time I was pretty snarky, due to the "female Lawrence of Arabia" hype and the seemingly dubious casting:
:
Angelina Jolie
Gertrude Bell
I even compared it to the infamous casting of John Wayne as Genghis Khan in The Conqueror. But even a bad movie about Gertrude Bell could do real well right this minute. Angelina, I hope it wasn't my snark three years ago that killed this project, because you could have been a millionaire and an enormous celebrity. (Oh, wait you already are, aren't you? Never mind then.)

Still, an un-romanticized, play-it-straight film about Gertrude Bell . . .

UPDATE: Apparently another film is now filming in Jordan starring the (equally un-Bell-like) Nicole Kidman.

Tuesday, June 17, 2014

Is ISIS Overextended?

A look at any of the news media maps showing areas under ISIS control looks appalling, but the speed and extent of its initial success may also be an indicator of its vulnerability. Consider: in under a week it seized much of the north of Iraq, though it has not fully conquered every town along the way. Its predecessor, Al-Qa‘ida in the Land of the Two Rivers, also found itself overextended and also challenged within the Sunni community. With a logistical tail extending back into Syria and its forward positions outside Baghdad to both the north and west, it's a thin, long line to maintain. Now that Shi‘ite resistance is firming up and hardening, its momentum is dwindling.

And along much of its long, exposed left flank lies another potential challenge: the Kurdish peshmerga. Hammer, meet anvil.

ISIS doesn't fight like a conventional military force and conventional military considerations may not apply, but if I were ISIS, I might worry.

UPDATE: Try this map for instance. Feeling surrounded yet?
 

Some Readings on Iraq by People Who Know Something About Iraq

Amid all the uninformed debate on the news channels, a few refreshing oases of actual information and analysis, from varying perspectives (some require registration):

Monday, June 16, 2014

Thoughts on the Iraq Blame Game

Oh, my, it's come to this: the media has dug up Paul Bremer and asked him what to do in Iraq. Since I try to limit the use of four-letter words here to discussions of linguistics or quotes from others, and since any discussion of this would consist of a prolonged spewing of profanities, I shall refrain.

All of the neocons, it seems, are coming out of the woodwork and, like the Bourbons in the phrase usually attributed to Talleyrand., they have learned nothing and forgotten nothing. Bill Kristol was just on CNN; Max Boot and various Kagans are writing op-eds, and I don't even watch Fox News. Has Dick Cheney checked in yet? The neocons, of course, say ISIS' successes in Iraq is all Obama's fault, since he didn't leave a residual force. (I have this odd memory that we tried but that the Maliki government wouldn't negotiate a status of forces agreement. I guess I hallucinated that.)

Those who don't blame Obama blame George W. Bush. Colin Powell's "Pottery Barn Rule" ("If you break it, you've bought it") is enjoying a revival. And certainly if the US had never gone into Iraq, or stayed so long, things might have evolved very differently.

But ultimate causation is an endless issue. Maybe it's all Saddam's fault, or the Iran-Iraq war. Maybe it was the Baath in general, or the 1958 Revolution, or Nuri's adherence to the Baghdad Pact. Maybe it was the British favoritism of Sunnis under the mandate, or the population bombing campaign in 1920 or of course, the usual suspects, Sykes and Picot. Ottoman policies could be responsible, or the Mongols' destruction of Baghdad and the irrigation system in 1258, or ... well, you get the point. You could play the blame game back to Sargon of Akkad, or the Sumerians.

I'm not exonerating Bush or Obama, by the way. (And as always, opinions on this blog are my own and do not reflect the views of The Middle East Institute, which does not take institutional positions on Middle Eastern controversies.)  Everyone who has touched Iraq played a role in this. And though you wouldn't know it from some of the US political debate. Nuri al-Maliki has alienated the Sunni allies he once had; Iran, the war in Syria, and the meddling of the Gulf States and Turkey are also contributors.

But while US policies since 2003 (or 1991) are clearly complicit, the debate over which political party deserves the blame and how exactly America should "fix" Iraq is typical American domestic politics. I would never hold myself out as an Iraq expert (I've spent a total of five days there, but have studied its politics and history), I'm amazed at the self-acknowledged Iraq experts turning up on TV. Nobody like Phebe Marr, or Charles Tripp, or Peter Sluglett, or Adeed Dawisha, or Toby Dodge, or Amatzia Baram, mind you, though Reidar Visser has given an interview or two. Washington think-tankers have some people who at least know the subject, and while I often disagree with Ken Pollack or Mike Eisenstadt, I respect their genuine knowledge of the background. But many commentators on both sides are just grinding political axes. Majid Khadduri and Hanna Batatu (two very different men, but both profoundly understood Iraq) must be restless in their graves. I particularly wish Batatu were available for comment.

The current American blame game reminds me as nothing so much as the debate among former Confederate Generals after the US Civil War over responsibility for the loss at Gettysburg. Although Robert E. Lee blamed himself ("It is all my fault") and George Pickett of Pickett's charge blamed Lee for the destruction of his division, Lee's death in 1870 meant he was beyond criticism. Ex-Confederates then engaged in vigorous debates in journals such as Confederate Veteran and Southern Historical Society Papers for years about responsibility for Gettysburg. Many blamed Jeb Stuart, the absence of whose cavalry left Lee without crucial intelligence; Stuart died in the war but guerrilla John S. Mosby became his defender. After Lee's apotheosis (and therefore immunity from criticism), some blamed Richard Ewell and Jubal Early for failing to take the high ground on the first day. Early himself then became the most vigorous advocate for blaming James Longstreet, who doubted the plan to assault the Union lines frontally and was accused of acting slowly as a result. (The fact that Longstreet became a Republican while U.S. Grant was President fueled the hostility.)

The whole ex-Confederate debate almost never noted the fact that at Gettysburg there were also some 75,000 Union troops on the battlefield, superior in numbers and occupying a secure position on higher ground, and that this just might have played a role in the Confederate loss.

Just as I feel both Maliki and ISIS may bear at least some of the responsibility for events in Iraq.

I'm Betting This Will Be Ignored: Salafi Says Not to Watch World Cup

 Egypt failed to qualify for the World Cup this year, but nevertheless I don't think this will fly: via Egypt Independent,  "Salafi leader Borhamy forbids Watching World Cup matches." 
Vice-Chief of the Salafi Dawa Yasser Borhamy has issued a religious edict, saying that Muslims are forbidden from watching football matches in the World Cup as it could be seen as admiring disbelievers.
In his edict posted on Ana Salafi, the official website of the Salafi Dawa, Borhamy said, “the World Cup matches distract Muslims from performing their [religious] duties. They include forbidden things that could break the fast in Ramadan as well as others forbidden in Islam like intolerance and wasting time. Football lovers like disbelievers of foreign teams’ players and others, which is rejected.”
Borhamy also called on football lovers to focus on their religion and stay away from such forbidden things.
This is the Deputy Chief of the Salafi Da‘wa Movement, the organization behind the Nour Party.

The Daily Star on Hans Wehr, Followed by Me on Hans Wehr

Beirut's Daily Star recently ran a piece called, "Wehr Next: On the joys of Reading Arabic Dictionaries," which should be appreciated by any English speaker who has studied or is studying Arabic, or who uses it regularly.  Hans Wehr's Arabic-English Dictionary: The Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic is the vademecum of English speakers working on or in Arabic, as its German original is (I presume) for German speakers.

Daily Star's illustration, not mine
The Daily Star article is pretty good, but with some observations that will seem simplistic for veteran Arabists:
"One paper is called the “idha’a tijariyya.” So I’m trying to translate that and all that comes to mind is that Lebanese radio station jingle – ‘Idha’a al-sharq ... in Beyrouth.’
Hans Wehr isn’t of much use because, quite honestly, I have no f?ing clue what the jidhr [root] of  “idha’a” is. According to Google Translate, “idha’a tijariyya” means “commercial radio,” which is confusing, as I thought I worked for a social development consulting firm, not a radio station.
“Consulting with a native Arabic-speaker,” Dushku says, “I learned ‘idha’a tijariyya’ is the ‘commercial broadcast announcement’ – as in the announcement of your registration as a commercial company. Who knew?”
Excuse me? "I have no f?ing clue what the jidhr [root] of “idha’a” is." (More properly idha‘a by the way.) Beyond the unusual choice of a "?" to euphemize an expletive, if you have "no f?ing clue" about how to determine an Arabic root, why are you being so "f?ing" pretentious as to use the term "jidhr"?   Dictionaries are organized by roots and you need enough knowledge of grammar to figure out the root, and that's how Arabic dictionaries work. No big deal. And the root is ذ ع ى.

Next complaint:
Heidelberg University Arabist Ines Weinrich says Wehr is the dictionary she uses most often, “although it is not well-equipped for texts from the seventh century.”
If there’s vocabulary in that seventh-century Arabic text of yours that really needs translating, she elaborates, “you may refer to some Latin or French [dictionaries], and, of course, the Arabic-English Lexicon of E.W. Lane.”
Well, duh. What part of "the Modern Written Language" don't you understand? Would you go to Webster for seventh-century Anglo-Saxon? (To be fair, Arabic has changed far less, but even Arabs need commentaries for Qur'anic Arabic. This isn't what Wehr is trying to do. When I work medieval texts, I use Lane, Kazimirski, Dozy, and the Lisan al-‘Arab, though I might check Wehr first, just in case.

Other issues raised are alphabetization versus root-based order, and utility in understanding spoken Arabic, an odd intrusion in discussion of  dictionary of "Modern Written Arabic."There are many colloquial dictionaries, but Wehr isn't one of them.

Hans Wehr (1909-1981) was a German Arabic scholar who created what has become the standard dictionary of Modern Written Arabic into German. In 1961 it was translated into English and edited by J Milton Cowan (no period after the "J": Cowan, whom I met once long ago, really did have just "J" as his first name.) and became the essential Arabic-English dictionary. Some English-speaking students of Arabic before that time had to own the German version as well as a German-English dictionary.

My first Wehr was a hard-cover purchased at ridiculously high cost in Cairo in 1972. The bulk of it survives, though the hard back cover is long gone and so are some pages, perhaps a whole binding signature, of parts of ha plus waw and ya. Once it came out in paperback, I acquired that, and two or three copies of the second and third editions are somewhere in this house, buried under other books. The fourth edition paperback is just to my left as I write, and a hardcover sits on my desk at work. I'm actually surprised that in five years of blogging, I haven't posted specifically on Wehr before this.

The first edition was published in German in 1952, but Wehr noted in early editions that most of the work was set in type during World War II. Wehr's exact relations with the Nazi regime are a bit fuzzy, though he was apparently a party member. I've seen it suggested the work was commissioned in order to facilitate translating Mein Kampf into Arabic, but that makes no sense as it's an Arabic-German dictionary, not the other way around, and besides, Mein Kampf had already appeared in Arabic in 1937. As the Daily Star article notes:
“Yes he was an NSDAP [National Socialist German Workers' Party] member (joined in 1940),” Hanssen notes, “but defenders point to his efforts to save his Jewish dictionary assistant, Hedwig Klein, from the Gestapo, ultimately unsuccessfully. His ‘defenders’ in the Orientalist guild downplay his critique of Zionism and support of Arab nationalism.”
And the dictionary has continued to be updated and revised since Wehr's death. It remains the essential work.

Friday, June 13, 2014

The Fight for Samarra: did ISIS Use a Helicopter?

The Iraqi city of Samarra is shaping up as the point where the Maliki regime and its Shi‘ite militia allies are standing and resisting the ISIS onslaught. Reports today indicate that an ISIS helicopter bobed or strafed Samarra today (above), the same day Prime Minister al-Maliki reportedly met with snior generals at a military base in the city. If the helicopter story is true, it raises many questions; Its known helicopters were captured in Mosul,  but it is unclear how they could be flying them, unless Iraqi pilots have also defected to them.

I would urge caution about the photo, though. It shows a high-flying attack helicopter, probably either an Mi-28 or an Mi-35. It has been reported that Iraq has been using both types in a ground attack role  around Samarra, and given the lack of context in the picture (from Twitter), I think this might show an Iraqi government helicopter operating against ISIS. ISIS has made at least three attempts to take Samarra in the past few days, and given the street-to-street close-order fighting I would not rule out the possibility that, if a helicopter did bomb an Iraqi base, it might have been a friendly fire mistake. If ISIS really does have operational helicopters, the question of who is piloting them needs to be answered.

Many accounts say that the core of the resistance to ISIS in Samarra may no longer be the Iraqi Army but the remobilized Shi‘ite militia groups rushed to the scene.
Although Samarra is today a mostly Sunni city, it is of profound symbolic importance to Shi‘ites, as it is the final resting place of two of the Twelve Imams of Shi‘ism, as well as the site of the disappearance or occlusion) of he Twelfth Imam. The Al-‘Askari or ‘Askariyya mosque/shrine (right, in better days) contains the final resting place of the 10th Imam, ‘Ali al-Hadi, and his son the 11th Imam, Hasan al-‘Askari. Shi‘ites believe the Twelfth Imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi, went into occlusion in an adjacent site, becoming the Hidden Imam or Imam Mahdi, who will someday make himself manifest again.The shrine was bombed on February 2006, destroying the golden dome, and again on Jun 13, 2007, destroying the two minarets. It has since been restored, but there are reports ISIS has threatened to destroy if if the city does not surrender peacefully, which has not happened. The Shi‘ite fighters appear determined to fight to protect it.

The downside may be if so much effort is being expended to defend Samarra, who's watching the back door, namely the western approaches to Baghdad via ISIS held Falluja and Ramadi>

Samara was founded in 836 AD by the Abbasid Caliph al-Mutasim, who moved the capital of the Caliphate to his new city, which he named Surra man ra', "he rejoices who sees it," but this was soon shortened to Samarra. It remained the capital until 892, when the Caliph al-Mu‘tadid returned it to Baghdad.

Samarra shrank in importance, but the sack of Baghdad by the Mongols in 1258 means there are almost no intact ‘Abbasid sites still standing in Baghdad, while a number, including the Great Mosque with its spiral, ziggurat-like minaret (left).

Strange Bedfellows: ‘Izzat Ibrahim, the Naqshbandi Order, and ISIS

‘Izzat Ibrahim al-Duri
I think I may be beginning to understand how the world must have felt when it learned of the Hitler-Stalin Pact in 1939 (not to mention how Poland must have felt.) Two blood-stained totalitarians with utterly incompatible ideologies suddenly became best friends (for less than two years). Think Sauron and Darth Vader if you will.

Over the past several days, multiple press reports have said that ‘Izzat Ibrahim al-Duri, the longtime number two man to Saddam Hussein and the only senior Ba‘athist of the ancien regime still alive, free, and active, is not just allied with ISIS but may be serving as an operational commander with their current offensive. Now ‘Izzat Ibrahim al-Duri is a longtime Ba‘athist with a commitment (presumably) to pan-Arab secular nationalists.

JRTN Logo
Complicating the picture still further is the fact that Ibrahim, who was somewhat more religious than other senior Saddam officials, and is an adherent of the large and influential Naqshbandi order of Sufism. He is frequently identified as leader of both the New Ba‘ath Party and of another Sunni militant group based on his al-Duri Clan and the Naqshbandi Order called the "Army of the Men of the Naqshbandi Order" (Jaysh Rijal al-Tariqa al-Naqshbandiyya, or JRTN from its Arab acronym).

ISIS flag
Now, to the radical jihadis of ISIS there are few things more evil than secularist pan-Arab Ba‘athists, though Sufis like the Naqshbandis are certainly a nearly equal enemy. The only thing jihadis think worse than secularists and Sufis may be Shi‘ites; Ibrahim and his ilk despise jihadists but seek revenge against the regime that displaced them. Hitler and Stalin were Best Friends Forever until they had digested Poland and the Baltics, but were soon engaged in the most lethal front of World War II. If it reaches the point where the JRTN and ISIS have devoured the Maliki regime (something Iran is unlikely to stand aside for),they would doubtless turn on each other.

Yesterday I noted that the seizure of Kirkuk by Kurdish peshmerga might mean they were there to stay; if Iraq collapses the KRG, which already enjoys near-de facto independence,might simply opt for de jure. Also yesterday I noted Maliki's call for re-mobilization of the armed Shi‘ite militias of the civil war era, and reports that Iranian force were also engaged. The circle seems to be closing.

A hat tip to retired Colonel Pat Lang,  US Defense Intelligence Officer during Desert Storm, for calling my attention to this.

I have never believed that Iraq's dissolution into Sunni, Shi‘ite and Kurdish regions was inevitable. But I don't think I ever said it was impossible. The way it seems to be happening is appalling and alarming, and not just for Iraq.
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
— William Butler Yeats, The Second Coming

Thursday, June 12, 2014

A (Sadly Only Slightly) Cynical Question

According to Wikipedia, on the US Embassy in Baghdad:
At 440,000 square meters, it is the largest and most expensive embassy in the world and is nearly as large as Vatican City. It employs 15,000 people and cost $750 million to build.
Sorry to be a bit snarky under the circumstances, but how many helicopters can land on the roof at at a time? (Young folks who don't recognize the picture, ask your elders.)

It Gets Worse: Maliki Calls for Help from the "Disbanded" Shi‘ite Militias

And Caesar’s spirit, ranging for revenge,
With Ate by his side come hot from hell,
Shall in these confines with a monarch’s voice
Cry ‘Havoc,’ and let slip the dogs of war;
—Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act III. Scene 1
Desperate to find a way to stop the ISIS juggernaut, Prime Minister al-Maliki has called on Iraqi  Shi‘ite militias from the sectarian civil war, most of which had disbanded by 2010, to mobilize and take the field. It may be a practical response to a situation spending out of control, but it exacerbates the polarization along Sunni-Shi‘ite lines in Iraq, already encouraged by the Iraqi government's mistreatment and suppression of Sunni groups such as the Sahwa ("awakening") forces, who had worked with US troops before their departure.

Amid separate reports by The Wall Street Journal that Iranian Al-Quds Force Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) are not merely in Iran but that two battalions are fighting to retake Tikrit, comes Maliki's call to the various Shi‘ite armed groups that had been dormant since the winding down of the sectarian civil war of the mid-2000s.

According to The New York Times,
Shiite militia leaders said that at least four brigades, each with 2,500 to 3,000 fighters, had been hastily assembled and equipped in recent weeks by the Shiite political parties to protect Baghdad and the political process in Iraq. They identified the outfits as the Kataibe Brigade, the Assaib Brigade, the Imam al-Sadr Brigade and the armed wing of the Badr Organization.
The first two names likely refer to the ‘Assa'ib Ahl al-Haq (League of the Righteous People) and the Kata'ib Hizbullah (Hizbullah Brigades, not organically linked to the Lebanese group); these, plus the Imam al-Sadr brigades, were originally offshoots of Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army which emerged as separate forces during the war; the Badr Organization, which originally was the military wing of the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq.  All enjoyed Iranian support.

Kurdish Peshmerga "Fully Control" Kirkuk: Are They There to Stay?

The fighting in Iraq is confused. but it seems clear that ISIS forces, while pursuing the Iraqi Army, are avoiding a direct assault on the peshmerga fighters of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). After some initial ISIS clashes with peshmerga in the Kirkuk area, the peshmerga now say they are "fully in control" in Kirkuk. And that raises some intriguing questions.

Since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003, the status of Kirkuk has been a matter of dispute, with Kurds returning to the city from which Saddam had removed m them in a program of Arbitration; the Iraqi Constitution left the issue for future agreement, and the City Council is carefully balanced ethnically. But the KRG sees it as a rightfully Kurdish city.

Now the KRG, officially acting as allies of the Maliki government, has driven ISIS out. (They have also said that they could have defended Mosul if asked. Baghdad is also saying it will work with the peshmerga to retake Mosul.

That may be. But it has long been the dream of the KRG to control Kirkuk, and now they say they do. Now that the peshmerga control Kirkuk, will Baghdad (if it regains control somehow) ever be able to persuade them to leave? [UPDATE: Apparently they're having the same thoughts: "Kurdistan's Peshmerga: We will not withdraw from any Kurdish areas under our control."

Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Historical Context: The Mosul Question Revisited

The fall of Mosul to ISIS, which controls territory in both Syria and Iraq, will probably engender another round of op-eds with titles like "The End of Sykes-Picot," which many mean as shorthand for "the end of the post-World War I border settlement in the Middle East." There are many problems with the phrase, not least of which is that the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement gave Mosul to France.

Or, a bit more precisely, it included Mosul in Area "A," the area under indirect French protection as opposed to direct rule. In fact, the fate of Mosul would be disputed continuously well into the 1920s. Mosul's fate was not settled by the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916, nor by the Treaty of Sèvres of 1920, nor by the San Remo conference that year, nor even by the Treaty of Lausanne of 1923, which resolved most other issues. It took an investigating commission from the League of Nations, and was only resolved after a Frontier Treaty between Turkey, Britain, and the Kingdom of Iraq in 1926, under which Britain promised to provide Turkey with 10% of Mosul's oil revenues for 25 years. Even after 1926, Turkish leaders have continued to occasionally threaten to revive the claim.

Why was Mosul such a thorny issue? Some background: Under the Ottomans, the Vilayet of Mosul consisted of the Sanjaks of Mosul, Kirkuk, and Suleimaniyya, roughly coinciding with the four northernmost provinces of Iraq today. Then as now, it was a multi-ethnic region, with Kurds, Arabs, Turkmen, Armenians, and several Christian, Yazidi, and until the 1950s Jewish populations. It was far from exclusively Arab, the Turks argued; Arabs noted that it was not overwhelmingly Turkish; Kurdish nationalists saw it as part of an independent Kurdistan.

Oh, did I mention the oil yet? The oilfields around Kirkuk were seen by the British as critical to the survival of the fledgling Kingdom of Iraq. Although the Kirkuk fields did not enter production until the 1920s, British oil interests and the Armenian entrepreneur Calouste Gulbenkian had secured oil concessions in the region even before the war.

Finally, the Turks were determined to recover Mosul because of the oil, of course, but also because the British had occupied it after the armistice. 

On October 30, 1918, at Mudros on the island of Lemnos, Great Britain and the Ottoman Empire signed the Mudros Armistice. It called for an end to hostilities on both sides. On November 2, three days later, Lieutenant General Sir William Marshall, British Commander in Mesopotamia, ordered British troops into the Vilayet of Mosul to secure the oilfields. Both the Ottomans and later the Turkish Republic saw this as a violation of the Armistice, and the treaties of Sèvres and Lausanne left the control of Mosul unresolved, though at Lausanne Turkey accepted League of Nations Arbitration.

Meanwhile, as I noted above, the Sykes-Picot Agreement had included Mosul in the French zone. This problem was easier to deal with than the Turkish claim.  During the Paris peace talks, on Sunday, December 1, 1918 during a meeting at the French Embassy in London, by David Lloyd George's own account, Georges Clemenceau asked him what he wanted, and Lloyd George immediately replied, "Mosul." Clemenceau then said "You shall have it. Anything else?" To which Lloyd George responded "Palestine from Dan to Beersheba," (or in another version, "Jerusalem.") (Much of Palestine was supposd to be under international control under Sykes-Picot.) Clemenceau, who wanted British support for French claims in the Rhineland, quickly agreed. Even Lloyd George seemed surprised it had been that easy, and French diplomats reportedly were annoyed that Clemenceau had given so much away for nothing concrete in return.

As I have noted, Mosul remained unsettled until the League of Nations, with Turkey's agreement at Lausanne, sent an investigative commission. That in turn awarded Mosul to Britain and Iraq, which Turkey initially rejected. Only in 1926 was the Frontier Treaty signed.

Tikrit Falls; Iraqi Army in Disarray as ISIS Advances

When an Army is unexpectedly faced with defeat, there is always the danger of it turning into a rout, sometimes a decisive one, such as the collapse of the German armies on the Western Front in October-November 1918, or of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam in March-April 1975, when even the North Vietnamese Army's own plans expected to achieve victory sometime in 1976, only to have Saigon fall to them in April of 1975. Both the German and Vietnamese cases were instances in which a war-weary Army, ordered into a tactical retreat, suddenly collapsed in panic, desertions, and mutiny. Sometimes a collapsing army can be rallied, as with the famous "Sheridan's ride" at the US Battle of Cedar Creek in 1864, but it is not clear if Iraq has a Phil Sheridan in reserve.

The fall of Mosul has been followed by the fall of Tikrit, and there are reports of widespread desertions from the Iraqi Army, while the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) is threatening Kirkuk.

One need not be a fan of the Maliki government to realize that the fall of the northern provinces to ISIS spells danger to the unity of Iraq (not to mention to Shi‘ites, Christians, Yazidis and other minorities). ISIS has gone from being an offshoot or subsidiary of al-Qa‘ida to being a force stronger than the original ever been, controlling a broad swath of territory in both Iraq and Syria. These are very dangerous times.

Tuesday, June 10, 2014

Elias Muhanna Strikes Back at His Critics; He Quaketh Not With Lugubriosity, But Responds with Humor

For over a week now debate has raged about Elias Muhanna's New Yorker piece about Disney's decision to dub Frozen in Modern Standard Arabic rather than Egyptian Colloquial (my post yesterday has links to the original article and many of the commentaries on it; a majority of the latter (and most of the comments on my own posts), rose to the staunch defense of MSA. Now BBC Newsnight had the bright idea of asking Elias (or rather some professor named "Elias Mahoona," which may be one of those "BBC pronunciations") to retranslate the MSA into a comparably formal English. He has done so, overdoing it just enough to produce hilarious results.

Bonus points for "Quaketh not I" and "Snow instigateth not lugubriosity within me."

I knew Elias Muhanna could be funny from some of his Qifa Nabki posts, It turns out this Mahoona fellow is pretty funny, too.

ISIS in Mosul, Threatening More of the North

The Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), the al-Qa‘ida affiliate operating in Iraq and Syria, has taken control of Mosul in a stunning setback to the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki. Though the Iraqi leader has promised to recover it "in 24 hours" and the Air Force is reportedly attacking ISIS, it is nevertheless the most significant jihadist gain in memory. ISIS also reportedly has seized parts of Kirkuk Province. They have reportedly taken control of a dam at Mosul and are threatening a power plant at Bayji near Tikrit; these could give them the ability to threaten key water and power supplies. There are unconfirmed reports that they have captured helicopters as well.

I fear stuff just got serious for Mr. Maliki, I fear, unless he can reverse this quickly. Mosul is a big deal, Iraq's second city.



This video reportedly shows the withdrawing vehicles of what it calls the "Safavid Army" (after a Persian dynasty, an epithet jihadis use for Maliki's Shi‘ite-dominated government); locals are apparently throwing stones at them:

Iraq may be in for a very rough ride.

Marsha B. Cohen Profiles Reuven Rivlin, Israel's New President

The Knesset has elected Reuven Rivlin as Israel's 10th President, succeeding Shimon Peres. The veteran Likud figure has an interesting background, noted by Marsha B. Cohen in her profile at LobeLog: "9 Facts About Israeli President Reuven Rivlin."

Monday, June 9, 2014

Meet the Sisis

Why are these people not smiling? The head of their family is being inaugurated President of Egypt, and only Madame al-Sisi (above center) isn't looking downright glum.

Yesterday seems to have marked the first time Sisi's entire family — wife, three sons and their wives, daughter and her husband — appeared together in public.

A useful guide to the family has been all over social media:

For those who don't read Arabic:

Front row, right to left:
1. Dalia Hegazy, wife of Hasan al-Sisi. She is the daughter of Gen. Mahmoud Hegazy recently named Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces.
2. Hasan al-Sisi,  an engineer.
3. Intissar al-Sisi, the President's wife (see my earlier post). I had previously noted that she is a cousin of Sisi's; this specifies that she is the daughter of his maternal aunt.
4. Mustafa al-Sisi, an officer in the Administrative Control Authority.
5. Rida,  wife of Mustafa al-Sisi and daughter of his paternal aunt.

Second row, right to left:
1. Personal name not given, but described as the husband of Ayat al-Sisi, Sisi's only daughter, and the son of Khalid Foda, Governor of South Sinai. 
2. Ayat al-Sisi.
3. Mahmoud al-Sisi, an officer in General Intelligence.
4. Nuha al-Tuhami, wife of Mahmoud al-Sisi.

I note in passing that Mahmoud al-Sisi is an officer in General Intelligence, that his wife is named Nuha al-Tuhami, and that the current head of General Intelligence is Muhammad Farid al-Tuhami, onetime superior of Sisi's. Tuhami is not an uncommon name and there may be no connection. Do any readers know if this is a coincidence? [UPDATE: at least one newspaper says Mahmoud is in Military Intelligence, his father's old service, rather than General Intelligence.]

Lameen Souag Chimes in on the Disney/MSA/Colloquial Debate

Algerian linguist blogger Lameen Souag joins in the ongoing debate on Modern Standard Arabic versus colloquial Arabic in the dubbing of Frozen at his Jabal al-Lughat blog: "Standard Arabic and cartoons." (For background, see Elias Muhanna's original New Yorker piece here, Arabic Literature (in English)'s symposium of responses here, and my own comments here and here, and the comments threads to all of these. It's a lively debate, and still growing.

Lameen expresses the sentiments he already posted in comments to my first post: MSA is preferable in North African since the Egyptian dialect used by Disney in previous movies is not understood there. And he argues it's an educational tool:
Let's start by looking around us. We see that younger generations understand Standard Arabic rather well, and have a much larger Standard Arabic vocabulary than earlier generations did at the same age. A cursory search suggests that cartoons have played a role in this; for example, Weyers 1999 shows that American students of Spanish improved their listening comprehension and used a larger vocabulary after watching a Spanish-language telenovela, and Blosser 1988 that Hispanic children, once they've mastered the basics of English, improve their English by watching more TV (although this does not seem to work below the age of 2). So parents are probably right to think that Standard Arabic cartoons are helping their kids learn Standard Arabic.
However – let's be honest – those same younger generations remain largely unable to write a grammatically correct paragraph in it, and normally speak in Standard Arabic only to quote prestigious texts or to parody TV presenters or politicians. This suggests that what they're gaining from it is limited to what Weyers 1999 identified for learners of Spanish: better comprehension and a larger vocabulary, but not better production. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that, in Algeria at least, Standard Arabic is effectively a read-only language: everyone under a certain age can understand it and read it, practically no one can express themselves in it correctly or confidently. So, as an educational tool, cartoons have their limits.
The debate about Arabic diglossia and whether to stress MSA versus colloquial never goes away, and while I feel both have a role I also think the dialects are under-emphasized, but I am not a native speaker or a trained linguist, so I defer to the experts. If you listen to TV talk shows and discussions, in real life most Arabs (except perhaps in the Maghreb), if addressing Arabs from multiple countries, tend to speak what is sometimes called "Middle Arabic," a sort of simplified MSA with some colloquial admixture.

I must give Elias credit for hitting a nerve here (as well as for an enviable byline in The New Yorker),but this is also a reminder of the enormous global power of Disney. People pay attention, and Frozen is Disney's hottest (well, wrong adjective in this case, but most popular) animated feature in years.

The Vatican Prayer "Summit": Merely Symbolic or Something More?

Stalin allegedly asked once, when someone brought up the influence of the Roman Catholic Church, "How many divisions does the Pope have?" Most versions claim Stalin said it to Churchill in 1944, but Churchill himself insisted it was actually said in 1935 to the (right-wing, later Vichy) French politician Pierre Laval, of all people.

It's been a long time since any Pope fielded an actual army, but the Papacy still has considerable clout in the world, and not only with Catholic countries, as Pope Francis' hosting of Israeli President Shimon Peres and Palestinian President Mahmoud ‘Abbas reminds us. Of course, bringing the two men together to pray and plant trees in the Vatican garden is merely symbolic; this was not a peace negotiation, and Peres is the 90-year old President who is on the very brink of retiring, not the Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, who could actually deliver a deal if he chose to.

The Pope says this was a prayer service for peace, not a negotiation or a mediation,saying that is a job for diplomacy, but the Pope has also referred in the past to the role of his namesake, Francis of Assisi, during the Crusades, when the saint met with the Ayyubid Sultan al-Malik al-Kamil, leading to truce negotiations.

But while the event may have been largely symbolic, coming at a time when Netanyahu is refusing to talk to ‘Abbas due the creation of a unity government that includes Hamas, symbols have power. Think of Sadat's visit to Jerusalem: it took two years from there to the Peace Treaty, but the image of the Egyptian President speaking to the Knesset was a breakthrough. Think of American "ping-pong diplomacy" with China in he Nixon years. Yesterday's meeting was clearly symbolic, but it offered the hopeful message I suspected the Pope was seeking.


Friday, June 6, 2014

More Debate on Colloquial, MSA, and Disney Dubbing

A week ago, I linked to Elias Muhanna's New Yorker piece questioning why Disney dubbed Frozen in Modern Standard Arabic instead of colloquial. It's provoked a lot of commentary, and now Marcia Lynx Qualey at the Arabic Literature (in English) blog has assembled a number of commentators and translators to debate the issue. Elias has responded and it is well worth reading: "Can’t ‘Let It Go’: The Role of Colloquial and Modern Standard Arabic in Children’s Literature and Entertainment."

On a related theme, also note this from Arabizi: “We must make space for non-standard Arabic if we really care about FuSHa”: Interviews with Spoken Arabic language teachers."

Amnesty: Egypt Planning for Mass Surveillance of Social Media

Amnesty International has issued a statement saying that the Egyptian Ministry of the Interior has issued a tender for a system that would allow mass surveillance of social media:
Under the proposed plans, disclosed in a leaked tender by the Ministry of Interior this week, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube and possibly mobile phone applications such as WhatsApp, Viber and Instagram would be systematically monitored.

“The plans by the Egyptian authorities to indiscriminately monitor social media a few months after the adoption of a new constitution guaranteeing the right to privacy shows the little regard they have for human rights or the rule of law. The plans also spark serious fears that systematic monitoring of social media networks will be used by the authorities to further clamp down on the slightest sign of dissent,” said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, Middle East and North Africa Deputy Director for Amnesty International.

Thursday, June 5, 2014

Adly Mansour Signs Off on Wave of Decreed "Legislation" on Eve of Depature

Really, I'm Still President
Egypt's Interim President Adly Mansour (remember him?) leaves office Sunday when Sisi is sworn in. He is, however, leaving with a bang: a string of legislative decrees (in he absence of Parliament, issued by the President), changing the number of seats in Parliament, altering the tax code, and making many other legal changes. Perhaps he's miffed that even before the elections, the press was talking about "President Sisi," or perhaps he's issuing decrees Sisi wants but would rather be able to blame someone else for.

Mansour, who will be returning to his role as head of the High Court, was not exactly a high profile, charismatic figure; he seemed to spend his less than a year as President in Sisi's shadow.

I'm reminded of the "Midnight Judges" case in US history. The second US President, John Adams, a Federalist, had been defeated by Thomas Jefferson, a Democratic-Republican, in the 1800 elections. Jefferson was due to take office on March 4, 1801. The outgoing Congress passed a new Judiciary Act creating new positions and, on March 3, the day before leaving office, Adams named 16 new Federalist circuit court judges and 42 new justices of the peace, also Federalists, presenting Jefferson with a partisan fait accompli. Jefferson's supporters derided the "Midnight Judges," and this gave rise to the critical Supreme Court case of Marbury vs. Madison, in which Chief Justice John Marshall laid down the principle that the Supreme Court had the power to rule acts of Congress unconstitutional.

Nevertheless, I suspect that Adly was not issuing these decrees without Sisi's prior consent, perhaps so Sisi could later say, "I didn't do that, it was that other guy, whatever his name was!"

And despite the parallel, Adly Mansour was no John Adams, and if Sisi turns out to be a new Thomas Jefferson, Egypt will be very lucky, and I will be pleasantly astonished.

7:45 AM, June 5, 1967: Operation Moked

Forty-seven years ago this morning, Israel launched a "pre-emptive" surprise attack against Arab airfields, virtually destroying the Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian air forces on the ground. It was the opening salvo of the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. Though long known as the "Six Day War," the war's outcome was essentially decided by noon on the first day. The remaining days were spent by the Israeli Army proceeding to occupy Gaza, Sinai, East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and the Golan Heights, enjoying total air superiority over the Arab states.

Each year since 2009 I've talked about various aspects of the 1967 War, and I refer you to all of those earlier posts. Almost everything in the Arab-Israeli conflict since 1967 owes something to that conflict; we are still trying to untangle the world it created. To the Arab nakba ("catastrophe") of 1948 was added the naksa ("setback") of 1967.

I belong to the school that thinks Nasser was on the verge of making a concession that would have avoided war but kept some of the gains he made in the escalating crisis (he was about to send his Vice President, Zakariyya Mohieddin, to the US and the UN), but we may never know for sure; in any event he was not given the chance to step back from the brink. This year's post will address Operation Moked ("Focus"), the Israeli surprise attack that opened the war.

I won't address motivation here, though there is some evidence that Moshe Dayan, who became Defense Minister only days before, believed that Israel had an opportunity that was likely to be lost over time, and so favored going to war once Nasser gave the Israelis a pretext. But that's an argument for another post.

While much of the world talks of a Six Day war, Ezer Weizman, who had only recently given up command of the Air Force to become Deputy Chief of General Staff, called the chapter in his memoirs "two and half hours in June," He says that on June 5, "At about ten o'clock in the morning I phoned [his wife] Re'uma: 'We've won the war!' She was considerate enough not to say what she thought of her husband going mad under the tension. She only said, 'Ezer, are you crazy? At ten o'clock in the morning? You've finished the war?' The war had five and a half days to run, but those were days when the Israeli Air Force had unchallenged control of the skies over Egypt and the Levant.

Air Force Commander "Motti" Hod
The Israelis knew that on June 5, 1967, they had precisely 196 operational combat aircraft, many of them aging. The Arab states challenging them had 500 or more, and much larger, less trained, armies. A first strike to alter the balance was seen as the proper opening blow. Weizman's successor as Air Force Commander, Mordechai "Motti" Hod, along with Dayan and the senior leadership, decided on a fairly desperate gamble. Of those 196 operational aircraft, only 12 (some accounts say as few as four) were held in reserve for combat air patrol over Israeli airspace. All the rest were devoted to taking out the Arab air forces: much depended on a single roll of the dice. And Egypt, the largest of them all, was the first order of business.

Tensions had been running high for weeks. Since surprise attacks often come at dawn, Egyptian pilots had been flying combat air patrols at dawn. But many senior officers did not arrive at their desks until nine AM. At the time, Egypt was on Summer Time but Israel was not. So 7:45 AM in Israel was 8:45 AM in Egypt, and the dawn patrols had returned to refuel the aircraft and allow the pilots to have breakfast. Most of the Air Force was on the ground. Many senior commanders were just arriving at work.

Egyptian air defenses were still rather poor. The concrete aircraft shelters and blast revetments found on most Middle Eastern air bases today (as a result of 1967) were unknown. Egypt had some SA-2 SAMs, but these were effective against aircraft at altitude; for low-level attack they were limited to anti-aircraft artillery. To make matters worse, Egypt's Defense Minister and Nasser's number two man, Field Marshal ‘Abd al-Hakim ‘Amer and several other senior officers were flying to the Sinai front to meet with troops there, so Egyptian air defenses scaled down their vigilance lest they accidentally shoot down their own boss.

Both sides were using far less advanced aircraft than today. Israel's were mostly French (the US did not sell aircraft to Israel until 1968), with some older British; Egypt's were mostly Soviet by this time, with some older British. Israel did have, and used with effect, a runway-cratering bomb that appears to have been an ancestor of the French Durandal.

The first wave took off from various Israeli bases and proceeded out over the Mediterranean skimming close to the water. In a carefully coordinated move the aircraft assumed formation in Egyptian airspace and began their attack.. The Wikipedia numbers generally track with others: 183 IAF aircraft destroyed 197 Egyptian aircraft and eight radar stations. A second wave (9:30 AM) was also aimed at Egypt, but after the Syrian and Jordanian Air Forces chose to enter the fray, the third wave (12:30 PM) turned against those air forces and Iraq's, hitting the Iraqi base at H3 just east of the Jordanian border.

By a bit past noon most of the Arab air forces were gone, and a great many runways cratered. It was a stunning blow, and made the remaining five and a half days of the war inevitable. By the end of the war Israel had destroyed 452 Arab aircraft, 79 in dogfights and the rest on the ground; it lost 46. It destroyed 338 Egyptian aircraft, most on the first day; 61 Syrian (out of perhaps 100 at most); 29 Jordanian; 23 Iraqi (at the H3 base); and one Lebanese.

Some relevant video:

V








Wednesday, June 4, 2014

Shocker: Asad Wins Third Term

Bashar al-Asad has (surprise, surprise!) won a third Presidential term. The Syrian regime is claiming 88.7% of the vote went to him (less than was claimed for Sisi in Egypt).  What's more, they're claiming a turnout of 73.47%. Does that include the opposition and all the refugees?

Tuesday, June 3, 2014

Kuwait Dodges the Bikini Bullet

Over the weekend, the Kuwaiti Parliament voted down a measure that would have banned "nudity" on Kuwaiti beaches. In the event you were previously unaware of the proliferation of nude beaches in Kuwait (as I was), "nudity" here really meant "bikinis." A committee rejected it on the grounds it was unconstitutional, though in cases like this I invariably wonder why they don't just vote "you're next door to Iraq which invaded you 20 years ago, and Iran, and have the Bidoon, sectarianism, and other social issues, and all you worry about is bikinis?"

Recently a woman in a bikini was ordered off a Kuwaiti beach, in another case a woman lost child custody in a divorce case because of a photo of her in a bikini with  a man not her husband (though in the Gulf the latter may have counted for more than the bikini). Qatar has also been cracking down, and the Kuwait Times suggests higher fees for running for Parliament to avoid nuisance legislation.

The whole thing reminds me of an Egyptian cartoon I ran back in 2011 (at left) in which a man stands among all of Egypt's economic and social problems and is screaming about bikinis.

Dina Al-Sabah, Kuwaiti Royal
In doing the basic research for this post, Google informed me of something I didn't know: the existence of a "professional figure competitor" (a profession of which I was unaware) named Dina Al-Sabah, who not only holds "figure competition" and some bodybuilding championships but also some awards for bikini modeling.

Some readers will have noticed the "Al-Sabah" in her name. Assuming we can trust Wikipedia here, she is a great-granddaughter of Sheikh Salim al-Mubarak Al Sabah (Ruler of Kuwait 1919-1921) and thus a great-great-granddaughter of Mubarak the Great, who is essentially the founder of modern Kuwait. Dina was not raised in Kuwait but her royal inheritance is unforgotten; still, her body modeling might not sit well with the rulers today. Still, I show her photo as a sign Kuwaitis can wear bikinis. Not so badly, in fact.

An Election Irony

Today was the day Egypt's Higher Elections Committee announced the official results of the elections, with Sisi winning with 96.91% of the vote. Ironically, it was also the day of the Syrian elections, a vote which is likely to make the Egyptian results look like a cliffhanger. Just because Bashar al-Asad doesn't control large portions of his country did not deter him from holding the vote. But whereas Sisi's one opponent actually campaigned (much more in fact than Sisi), the two "opponents" of Asad essentially endorsed him. Many will think the Egyptian results improbable, but few if any will doubt that the Syrian results are a farce.

US Hands Over Manas to Kyrgyzstan

In a ceremony today, the US handed over to Kyrgyzstan the US-run Manas Transit Center; which has been used as a logistical and staging base for the war in Afghanistan. Last year, the Kyrgyz Parliament, pressured by Russia,ave the US until this summer to withdraw. drawdown in Afghanistan means that Manas is less critical to the US effort, but the handover reflects Russia's increasing influence in former Soviet states.

Monday, June 2, 2014

Intissar Amer (Madame al-Sisi): First Lady or Invisible Consort? The Many Styles of Egypt's First Ladies

The photo above shows a rare appearance of then-Field Marshal Sisi in public with his wife, Intissar Amer. It dispelled rumors that she wears he full veil, but indications so far re that she will keep a low public profile when she becomes Egypt's First Lady. During the Presidencies of Anwar Sadat and Husni Mubarak, when the title "First Lady" was applied as a semi-official title and the incumbents had a highly-visible public profile. made the President's wife a public figure on he world stage, but not all of Egypt's first ladies have been as high-profile  as Jehan Sadat and Suzanne Mubarak.

Under the monarchy, of  course, the queens had a high public profile. Fuad I's Queen, Nazli, and Farouq's Queens, Farida and, after their divorce, Nariman, were given the public roles due to royalty on the European model. Of Middle Eastern monarchies, Egypt and Jordan gave their queens high levels of publicity and  public role, unlike Morocco or the Arab Gulf monarchies. But there has been considerable variation since the fall of the monarchy. Omitting transitional and interim figures:

Muhammad Naguib's wife, ‘A'isha Muhammad Labib, who was at least his second wife, played no real public role and remains little known. Some references even give her the first name ‘Aziza.

Nasser and Tahia's Wedding
Gamal ‘Abdel Nasser's wife had a more public role, though not nearly as visible as her two successors. Tahia Kazem, also called Tahia ‘Abdel Nasser,was the daughter of an Iranian father and Egyptian-Iranian mother. She was frequently photographed with her husband and children but did not have the high profile public role of her two successors.

During Nasser's Presidency
Tahia, who died in 1990, wrote a memoir of her life with Nasser which was not intended for publication. It was finally published in 2011 in Arabic, and last year in English. She thus joined, belatedly, Jehan Sadat in publishing her memoirs.

Jehan Sadat
Anwar Sadat's wife, Jehan, became the first Egyptian First Lady to play a major role in public, and to achieve international fame.in her own right. Jehan Safwat Ra'ouf, better known as Jehan El Sadat, married Sadat in 1949, shortly after his divorce from his first wife, Iqbal Mahdi, by whom he had three daughters. Jehan was the teenaged daughter of an Egyptian doctor and his British wife. (Many Egyptians believe that her mother was actually Maltese, but public documents show her mother was from Sheffield, as she asserts in her memoir. Some suggest the Maltese rumor may have originated when the Free Officers did not want to seem linked to the British occupation.) During the Sadat years the term First Lady (al-Sayyida al-Ula) began to be regularly, if unofficially, used. After Sadat's assassination, Jehan worked to keep his legacy alive, in part through the Anwar Sadat Chair at the University of Maryland. where she is a senior fellow.

Suzanne Mubarak
Husni Mubarak's wife. Suzanne Thabet, officially known as Suzanne Mubarak, is, like her predecessor, the daughter of an Egyptian doctor and a British mother, in her case a Welsh nurse. Like her predecessor she had a high profile, founded or was patron of schools and charities, and is believed to have been a strong supporter that her younger son Gamal should succeed his father. She was reported to be writing her memoirs before the Revolution broke out, and after the revolution Rose al-Youssef published what it claimed were excerpts, but many believe these, such as other leaks purporting to be her husbands memoirs, are a hoax.The source is highly dubious, to be generous.

Muhammad Morsi's wife, Nagla' ‘Ali Mahmoud, was a striking departure from her two fashionable predecessors. She wore the hijab, flatly refused to be called First Lady (saying she preferred "Umm Ahmad"), but she did give occasional interviews and discuss her role.

Which brings us to Madame Sisi, Intissar Amer. Sisi has said that they met in secondary school and he married her on graduation from the Military Academy in 1977. She is said to dislike public appearances and has not pursued a career, preferring to raise her family. She does not dress as conservatively as rumors speculated, but modestly, at least based on that one photo, but from what is known of her she is likelier to follow the Tahia Nasser model than the Jehan Sadat or Suzanne Mubarak one.

Bassem Youssef's Show Will Not Be Returning

Egyptian satirist Bassem Youssef has announced that his show, which had been on hiatus so as not to influence the Presidential elections, will not return to the air.
"The environment that we live in is not suitable for the show and I am tired and we are at the end of our tether," Youssef said on Monday. "To those who are happy the show stopped: I tell them that the stopping of El-Bernameg is a victory for us."
I'm not so sure I see the "victory" in the news.