Radical Islamic Jihad and moderate Hamas

The Palestinian daily Al-Quds today features a front-page editorial analyzing the recent cross-border hostilities and especially the Israeli air strikes on Gaza, outlining its perception of Israel’s various strategic and geo-political considerations.

Headlined “Israel tries to create a rift between Hamas and Islamic Jihad,” the piece notes the two factions’ disparate responses to the air strikes, and stresses that Hamas is in a state of truce with Israel whereas Islamic Jihad is far from it. This is creating a stir in internal Palestinian politics to the point where some Islamic Jihad officials are now painting Hamas — which did not itself fire rockets into Israel, and was central to the fragile ceasefire negotiations — as collaborators with Israel.

The paper points out the irony that the power dynamic which years ago characterized the relationship between Hamas and Fatah – in which the former denounced the latter for acquiescence, appeasement, and collaboration with Israel – has now shifted to that between Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The article does, however, finish its segment on inner-Palestinian politics with news of a series of meetings between Hamas and Islamic Jihad officials, designed to achieve common ground between the two on dealings with Israel.

On the strategic front, the editorial echoes Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal in its analysis of Israel’s ostensible militaristic interests in sparking the flare-up (which began eight days ago after Israel killed Zuhair al-Qaissi in an airstrike in Gaza City, later stating that the Popular Resistance Committees head was plotting a major terrorist infiltration into Israel): “Israel wanted to test its Iron Dome rocket-defense system, as well as gather information on the Palestinian fire-power capabilities ahead of a potential attack in Iran.”

The writer says that when this scenario was presented to Hamas officials, they kept their cards close to their chests and remained mum on the possibility of Hamas engaging in reprisal attacks on Israel were it to strike at Iran. In contrast, the piece continues, Islamic Jihad is quite unequivocal in its response. It informs Al-Quds that it will absolutely respond with even more missile attacks were Israel to strike in Iran.

All await Annan’s report

The Qatari pan-Arab news network Al-Jazeera reports on a critical upcoming benchmark for Syria – former UN secretary general Kofi Annan’s special report.

It notes that there is an atmosphere of impatience and unrest brewing amongst the international community: “Following Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, the Gulf countries also announced that they will be closing their embassies in Syria.”

In this climate, Annan’s report is regarded as one of the last measures that could possibly bring forth a diplomatic solution, as the network stresses Annan’s insistence on a “peaceful resolution.”

However, Al-Jazeera is plainly dubious. First, it makes a point of mentioning Bashar Assad’s lack of cooperation with Annan throughout the 10-day process: “Assad was quick to dismiss any kind of foreign intervention in Syria as unacceptable.” Second, it quotes various Arab officials’ growing sense of disenchantment with Assad and his capacity to foster a peaceful solution – even with the aid of Annan: “The Saudi secretary general of Parliament expressed his country’s complete rejection of Assad’s policies, indicating that the Syrian leader has clearly chosen a military option which disregards any possibility of foreign relief or inner-diplomacy,” it notes.

Al-Jazeera chooses a tellingly despondent image of Annan to illustrate this article, standing alone in Syria’s presidential palace.

Hundreds out in Egypt in solidarity with Samira Ibrahim

Egypt’s top daily newspaper Al-Ahram leads its Saturday edition with reports of a large gathering in front of the Egyptian attorney general’s office in protest at the recent verdict on the matter of Samira Ibrahim and the “virginity tests.”

“In a mass demonstration,” the paper reports, “hundreds of protesters planted themselves in front of the attorney general’s office to demand an end to military tribunals, and to stand as one with Samira Ibrahim.”

Ibrahim filed charges last year against Egypt’s military government when, following a protest in Tahrir Square during the revolution, she and six other unmarried women were arrested, stripped down, and subjected to forced “virginity tests” by Egyptians officials. The military court dismissed Ibrahim’s suit – a verdict which led to the present protest.

Al-Ahram’s attention to the protests is extremely noteworthy given the fact that the publication has usually made it a point to avoid direct criticism of government policies and decisions. Whereas this coverage is not overt criticism per-se, there are definitely hints of anti-military-government sentiment in its reporting of the arrest and maltreatment of the six women, and empathy in its portrayal of Ibrahim.

A-Sharq Al-Awsat shatters food myths

The Saudi publication A-Sharq Al-Awsat offers readers of its Saturday edition an extensive article in its nutrition section which attempts to “gather evidence from a multitude of studies, and offer an accurate and unadulterated report of various foods and their health values.”

It starts with two areas where it claims that the general consensus is accurate – nuts and fish oil. These two nutrients, the paper concurs from its research, go a long way towards fighting heart disease and lowering cholesterol. The paper continues, however, with two “food myths” – eggs and olive oil. Eggs, on the one hand, which are generally considered harmful to one’s health and full of “bad” cholesterol, are actually perfectly fine in measured doses. The paper suggests that “Eating six eggs a week can actually have health benefits.”

Olive oil, usually considered the healthiest of oils, is deemed far from it according to A-Sharq Al-Awsat. “While many tout its high levels of healthy fats,” the paper reports, “it is in actuality one of the oils with the least amount of certain unsaturated fats which help fight heart disease.”