Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

https://hdl.handle.net/2450/13582

Browse

Now showing 1 - 10 of 11

No Longer Invisible: Arab and Muslim Exclusion After September 11
(Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), 2002-09-01) Cainkar, Louise
After the September 11, 2001 attacks, Arab and Muslim Americans faced unprecedented scrutiny, violence, and discrimination, marking a significant shift in their visibility and treatment in American society. The backlash included hate crimes, increased government surveillance, and public support for profiling and restrictive measures targeting these communities. Government actions, such as arbitrary detentions and discriminatory immigration policies, exacerbated feelings of exclusion and fear. Despite some efforts towards greater public education about Islam and increased dialogue, the overall climate remained hostile, deeply affecting the identities and daily lives of Arab and Muslim Americans. The article argues that this period exposed not only the vulnerability of these communities but also underlying societal prejudices.
War Will Not Bring Democracy to the Middle East
(Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), 2003-02-01) Senzai, Farid
Advocates of the Iraq War argued that regime change would catalyze a democratic wave across the Middle East. However, this perspective is misguided. Historical precedents, such as the 1953 CIA coup in Iran and recent experiences in Afghanistan, demonstrate that democracy cannot be imposed through military intervention. Instead, war is likely to increase regional instability and repression, fueling anti-American sentiment. True democracy promotion requires non-military approaches, as evidenced by Secretary of State Powell's $25 million democratic initiative for the Middle East. The article concludes that war with Iraq is unlikely to bring democracy to the region and may exacerbate existing tensions.
Response to the 9/11 Commission Report
(Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), 2004-11-01) Senzai, Farid
In response to the 9/11 Commission Report, Farid Senzai critiques the recommendations and underlying assumptions of the report. The Commission calls for a coalition strategy involving Muslim nations to combat terrorism, which Senzai views as a positive step that American Muslims should support. However, Senzai argues that the U.S. has mishandled its relations with the Muslim world, relying on neoconservative "experts" whose views have exacerbated anti-American sentiment. He stresses the need for a clear definition of terrorism, criticizing the Commission for conflating Islamist terrorism with terrorism in general, which risks aligning with extremist rhetoric. Senzai emphasizes that a multifaceted approach involving political, diplomatic, and military means, and closer cooperation with American Muslims, is essential for a successful long-term strategy against terrorism.
Can Lebanon Region Be Calmed? Will Hariri's Assassination Cause Further Destabilization? There May Be Ways to Avoid Disaster
(Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), 2005-02-18) Gerges, Fawaz A.
In this article, Fawaz Gerges discusses how the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri has significantly heightened tensions in Lebanon, threatening its fragile peace. Hariri, a critic of Syria's influence in Lebanon, was killed in a bomb attack that many suspect involved Syrian or pro-Syrian elements, though concrete evidence is lacking. This event has intensified international pressure on Syria to withdraw its 14,000 troops from Lebanon. To prevent further destabilization, the international community must engage Syria diplomatically and ensure Lebanon does not become a hostile environment for Syrian interests. The key challenge is integrating Hezbollah into Lebanon's political framework while addressing the broader Arab-Israeli conflict and instability in Iraq. Without comprehensive diplomatic efforts involving Syria, Iran, and Hezbollah, lasting peace in the region remains elusive.
Free Commerce vs. National Security: Is There Really a Contradiction?
(Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), 2005-03-21) Eland, Ivan
The article "Free Commerce vs. National Security: Is There Really a Contradiction?" by Ivan Eland examines the conflict between free trade and national security using the Bush administration's opposition to a proposed natural gas pipeline from Iran through Pakistan to India as a case study. The administration opposed the pipeline to isolate Iran, despite the pipeline's potential to foster economic development and peace in South Asia. Eland argues that free commerce can reduce conflict and promote Western values over time, while sanctions and military actions are often counterproductive. He calls for a more thoughtful approach to national security that embraces free trade as a means to enhance global stability.
'Bush League' Trade Policy
(Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), 2005-04-04) Powell, Benjamin
Benjamin Powell critiques the Bush administration's consideration of "safeguard" quotas to protect U.S. textile and apparel industries from rising Chinese imports. He argues that protectionism harms consumers and fails to protect overall employment in the U.S. The Multi-Fiber Agreement's end led to a significant increase in Chinese imports, sparking calls for protectionist measures. However, historical evidence shows that trade policies do not affect total job numbers, as employment depends on labor force size. Powell emphasizes that free trade reallocates labor and capital to more productive areas, benefiting consumers with lower prices. Imposing quotas would raise consumer costs and reduce economic productivity, counter to economic theory and free trade principles.
Reforming the Homeland Security Department is Unlikely
(Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), 2005-04-18) Eland, Ivan
Ivan Eland argues that reforming the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is unlikely due to poor incentive structures and political pressures. Despite Secretary Michael Chertoff's admission of intelligence failures and his pledge to prioritize risk-based funding, DHS continues to focus more on responding to attacks rather than preventing them. This is largely due to powerful local lobbies and Congressional representatives pushing for funds to improve local services under the guise of homeland security. Furthermore, the massive size and complexity of DHS, formed from 22 federal agencies, hinder effective intelligence sharing. Eland suggests that without genuine incentives for change, the imbalance and inefficiencies within DHS are likely to persist, potentially leading to another major security failure.
Americans Are Finally Waking Up to the Failure of U.S. Policy in Iraq
(Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), 2005-06-22) Eland, Ivan
Ivan Eland discusses the growing discontent among Americans regarding U.S. policy in Iraq, highlighting a significant decline in public support for the war. Recent polls indicate that a majority of Americans disapprove of the Bush administration's handling of the situation and believe the U.S. should not have invaded Iraq. This shift in public opinion has emboldened Congress to propose measures for withdrawing U.S. forces. Eland argues that historical precedents, such as the Vietnam War, show the importance of congressional oversight in ending unnecessary military engagements. He criticizes the administration's reliance on Sunni political participation and the establishment of Iraqi security forces, suggesting these efforts are unlikely to succeed before public patience runs out. Eland concludes that the administration should acknowledge the war's failure, set a withdrawal schedule, and negotiate a comprehensive peace settlement.
London Attacks Question Our Humanity
(Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), 2005-07-07) Khan, Muqtedar
In "London Attacks Question Our Humanity," Muqtedar Khan reflects on the July 7, 2005, terrorist attacks in London, drawing parallels to the 9/11 attacks. He expresses solidarity with the victims and calls for an end to the cycle of violence that threatens global peace and reconciliation. Khan condemns the terrorists' actions, which betray the principles of Islam, and highlights the broader impact of such violence on the moral fabric of civilization. He urges a reevaluation of how political and ideological goals are pursued, emphasizing the need to uphold the sacred value of life to prevent further tragedy and conflict.
Karen Hughes and American Muslims: Alliance against Extremism
(Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), 2005-09-12) Khan, Muqtedar
In "Karen Hughes and American Muslims: Alliance against Extremism," Muqtedar Khan discusses Karen Hughes' meeting with American Muslim leaders at the Islamic Society of North America convention. Hughes, a key advisor to President Bush, engaged in open dialogue, aiming to bridge gaps between American Muslims and the U.S. government. She introduced her strategy of Education, Empowerment, Engagement, and Exchanges, emphasizing the need for American Muslims to act as credible ambassadors for Islam. Despite initial skepticism, Muslim leaders were encouraged by her willingness to address Islamophobia and promote collaboration. Khan highlights that while Hughes' approach is promising, genuine changes in U.S. policies towards the Muslim world are essential for lasting progress.

Browse

Browsing Publications by Issue Date

Results Per Page

Sort Options