تهافت السياسة في لحظة الإبادة
4 days ago
Monday, August 23, 2010
Monday, August 16, 2010
Spotlight Series: Silat Wassel
SFUSA: Silat Wassal is using art as a tool for conflict resolution and peacebuilding. Could you tell me a little bit about that? Are you focusing on a particular area? What is that area like?
Silat Wassel: We mainly have our activities in the north; right now we are taking part of a project called the Middle East Expedition (Jordan, Syria, Lebanon) and soon we will work over all the Lebanese territories on the same website project. It aims to activate the dialogue between different sects of society through artistic, cultural, social and environmental activities. It also aims to create an atmosphere of non-violence through events and workshops with different age groups in marginalized communities.
SFUSA: I understand that you have just recently gotten NGO status, so you must be pretty new. Do you have a website? If not, do you have plans to establish one? It would be great to see some of the art even if we are across the ocean!
Silat Wassel: We are working on creating LNCA (Lebanese Network for Civic Achievements), a network that should be formed by youth NGOs working in the north and then maybe expand it to the other Casas of Lebanon.
Concerning the website, we are preparing to launch a big interactive website by the end of the summer. This website will be used by youth to create advocacy groups in their local governments, municipalities, etc.
SFUSA: Where did you get the idea for using art as a tool for conflict resolution?
Silat Wassel: I, myself, am an artist and two other members are also artists. We figured out ways to use art as a tool to fight violence, and we also do social training, capacity building, and public awareness workshops.
SFUSA: What do you envision for the future of your organization? Do you think the international community could do more to help peacebuilding projects in Lebanon?
Silat Wassel:The Together We Live project is a series of workshops to establish a culture of dialogue between youth of different backgrounds.
As for what could the international community do concerning the peace building projects, we think there should be some sort of sustainability in projects; for example, we trained for the past couple of years around 700 participants from all over the north on conflict management and citizenship, thus we had an idea that we should keep on seeing them and working with them and so we created an idea of (Center for Public Awareness (CPA).
Silat Wassel: We mainly have our activities in the north; right now we are taking part of a project called the Middle East Expedition (Jordan, Syria, Lebanon) and soon we will work over all the Lebanese territories on the same website project. It aims to activate the dialogue between different sects of society through artistic, cultural, social and environmental activities. It also aims to create an atmosphere of non-violence through events and workshops with different age groups in marginalized communities.
SFUSA: I understand that you have just recently gotten NGO status, so you must be pretty new. Do you have a website? If not, do you have plans to establish one? It would be great to see some of the art even if we are across the ocean!
Silat Wassel: We are working on creating LNCA (Lebanese Network for Civic Achievements), a network that should be formed by youth NGOs working in the north and then maybe expand it to the other Casas of Lebanon.
Concerning the website, we are preparing to launch a big interactive website by the end of the summer. This website will be used by youth to create advocacy groups in their local governments, municipalities, etc.
SFUSA: Where did you get the idea for using art as a tool for conflict resolution?
Silat Wassel: I, myself, am an artist and two other members are also artists. We figured out ways to use art as a tool to fight violence, and we also do social training, capacity building, and public awareness workshops.
SFUSA: What do you envision for the future of your organization? Do you think the international community could do more to help peacebuilding projects in Lebanon?
Silat Wassel:The Together We Live project is a series of workshops to establish a culture of dialogue between youth of different backgrounds.
As for what could the international community do concerning the peace building projects, we think there should be some sort of sustainability in projects; for example, we trained for the past couple of years around 700 participants from all over the north on conflict management and citizenship, thus we had an idea that we should keep on seeing them and working with them and so we created an idea of (Center for Public Awareness (CPA).
Thursday, August 5, 2010
A Blackberry Eye for Lebanese Democracy?
Last week, the UAE and Saudi Arabia decided to block Blackberry services due to what they cited as security concerns. India, which had been considering such a move because Blackberry is what the Mumbai terrorists had used to communicate, decided against such a move. Blackberry’s encryption technology is such that users actually have privacy when communicating with Blackberry devices.
Both UAE and Saudi Arabia are non-democratic regimes and have strict censorship laws, so it is understandable that they would seek to block any communications service they can't intercept. It’s just quotidian life in most of the Arab world.
But Lebanon?
Today the Lebanese Telecommunications Ministry announced it would review Blackberry services over “security” fears. This comes on the day that the U.S. State Department released its 2009 Country Reports on Terrorism, in which seven designated terrorist organizations were mentioned along with Hezbollah.
Do we really believe these considerations are for “security” purposes?
The Blackberry “discussions” are just the latest in a series of anti-free speech developments in Lebanon. These include the recent passage of an e-transactions law that creates an all powerful governmental body to oversee internet transactions and the arrest of four people who posted anti-Sleiman messages on Facebook.
This is not to mention Lebanon’s woefully inadequate internet infrastructure, which also affects Blackberry information services. The government has paid lip service to infrastructure improvements, agreeing in principle to buying more bandwidth but somehow finding a way to keep that bandwidth from reaching people.
Yet, I find it difficult to believe the Lebanese government is motivated by the same authoritarian impulses of its UAE and Saudi counterparts. No, Lebanon may have just a shadow of a real democracy, but the Lebanese government is not really seeking to control the communications of its citizens. Rather, it seeks to control the flow of money resulting from its citizens needs and desires for information and communications technology. It does this by passing go and collecting its $200 again and again and again and again.
We can only hope Research In Motion, the company that makes Blackberry devices, does not cave in to non-democratic regimes across the world and alter their devices so that governments can monitor the lives of their citizens. We all know how Google, Yahoo, and other tech companies have succumbed to the dictatorial commands of such authoritarian regimes as China (fortunately, Google changed its mind early this year.) Hopefully in the Blackberry case, human rights will triumph over the Almighty Dollar.
Both UAE and Saudi Arabia are non-democratic regimes and have strict censorship laws, so it is understandable that they would seek to block any communications service they can't intercept. It’s just quotidian life in most of the Arab world.
But Lebanon?
Today the Lebanese Telecommunications Ministry announced it would review Blackberry services over “security” fears. This comes on the day that the U.S. State Department released its 2009 Country Reports on Terrorism, in which seven designated terrorist organizations were mentioned along with Hezbollah.
Do we really believe these considerations are for “security” purposes?
The Blackberry “discussions” are just the latest in a series of anti-free speech developments in Lebanon. These include the recent passage of an e-transactions law that creates an all powerful governmental body to oversee internet transactions and the arrest of four people who posted anti-Sleiman messages on Facebook.
This is not to mention Lebanon’s woefully inadequate internet infrastructure, which also affects Blackberry information services. The government has paid lip service to infrastructure improvements, agreeing in principle to buying more bandwidth but somehow finding a way to keep that bandwidth from reaching people.
Yet, I find it difficult to believe the Lebanese government is motivated by the same authoritarian impulses of its UAE and Saudi counterparts. No, Lebanon may have just a shadow of a real democracy, but the Lebanese government is not really seeking to control the communications of its citizens. Rather, it seeks to control the flow of money resulting from its citizens needs and desires for information and communications technology. It does this by passing go and collecting its $200 again and again and again and again.
We can only hope Research In Motion, the company that makes Blackberry devices, does not cave in to non-democratic regimes across the world and alter their devices so that governments can monitor the lives of their citizens. We all know how Google, Yahoo, and other tech companies have succumbed to the dictatorial commands of such authoritarian regimes as China (fortunately, Google changed its mind early this year.) Hopefully in the Blackberry case, human rights will triumph over the Almighty Dollar.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
