This is the first humanitarian dictionary for colleagues and practitioners in the field! And it’s open access for everyone.
I contributed with the entries ‘livelihoods’ and ’emergency’.
You can download the file by accessing this link:
This is the first humanitarian dictionary for colleagues and practitioners in the field! And it’s open access for everyone.
I contributed with the entries ‘livelihoods’ and ’emergency’.
You can download the file by accessing this link:
No one wants to be the “Global North”? On being a researcher across the North and South
In this blog post I would like to share my personal experiences of carrying out qualitative research in what contemporary scholars call the “Global South” (Lebanon, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt) and the “Global North” (Australia and the United Kingdom). To convey my message clearly, I adopt the classical political geography of “South” and “North” with the intention of neither confirming these narrow categories nor of universalizing my personal experiences but in order to work towards an honest sociology of knowledge through such peculiar experiences.
In particular, I discuss what I think are some of the emerging behavioral and ethical tendencies in today’s research economy and its main methodologies. On the one hand, the reluctance in the “Southern” environments in recognizing their own tendency to embrace predominant ways of producing knowledge. On the other, the reluctance of “Northern” research entities to acknowledge their own positionality within the global scenario – that is, accepting the fact of conducting research as outsiders and, above all, the sociological harm of pretending localism. The result of these two tendencies is, from my perspective, a globalized impoverished attention to factual awareness, which depends on the personal involvement of researchers in the context they study and the cultivation of the capability to build and rebuild a continual relationship with the subjects and the places studied beyond the duration of fieldwork research.
The “Southern” tendency to perceive the practice of producing research as antithetical or substantially different to the North consistently builds on the universal romanticization of the research produced in the Global South, cutting across the North and the South. Indeed, while the research and academic institutions that I worked for in the Global South tended to believe that their fieldwork quality standards were inherently higher, the fact of being at the mercy of external – and unstable – sources of funding often endangered their existence and alternative ways of working. In these circumstances, fieldwork mostly took place in relatively small timeframes and, likewise, theories needed to be quickly wrapped up, making it difficult to identify any effective counter-culture of knowledge production. Studies on publishing locally and perishing globally have importantly highlighted the material constraints of localizing research. While “Southern” knowledge is barely known and mentioned by North-produced researchers (although it often marks significantly several fields of studies), it is also important to add that, in my own experiences across the Arab world, large segments of upper and middle classes tend to receive their postgraduate education and establish their scholarship in Northern institutions, thereby being trained according to Northern criteria while trying to preserve their reputation of being local researchers. In similar ways, Southern institutions often delegate fieldwork to research assistants who struggle to receive intellectual acknowledgment. (The same acknowledgment that many “Southern” research institutions have been looking for in the international arena, still dominated by Global North’s epistemologies and funding sources). In this regard, I have seen no co-authorships offered to research assistants, who undergo processes of alienation similar to those recently discussed in the context of the institutions of the Global North. Likewise, I have witnessed similarly exploitative relationships which seek to build knowledge upon the anonymity and the belittling of an underpaid workforce, whatever the latter’s passport is.
Despite acknowledging the partially ethnic character of some of these power dynamics – such as European academics versus local researchers in the Arab Levant, mostly when the former lack the necessary linguistic skills and in-depth knowledge of the research settings – I would like to emphasize some nuances. While the global archetype of neoliberal academia certainly does not stem from Southern institutions, largely due to colonial legacies, in my experience I have identified hierarchical and alienating structures of research-making across different cultural patterns of knowledge production.
Dauntingly, ethical research and decolonial methodologies are becoming tokenistic worldwide, turning into a further disenfranchisement of diversely vulnerable researched subjects, such as refugees. In this scenario, the Global North currently promotes itself as a pioneer advocate of ethical research – a phenomenon which has led to a proliferation of publications on the topic, rather than finally aiming for a radical transformation of research and for the uprooting of the vulnerabilities of the researched.
With no intention to bury unequal historical relationships, the intrinsic “non-ethicness” of such structural deficiencies needs to be observed across Norths and Souths. To ethnographers, if quality fieldwork means collecting relevant data, it also needs to mean collecting what matters at a local level and in an appropriate way. Contextual relevance and cultural appropriateness inevitably require generous timeframes. Doing less but long-term research and paying under-explored forms of respect to the researched may be the way to go.
Moreover, a pressing question may center on the tyranny of grants and funding, which is said to dictate the design of today’s projects. To what extent is this the cause of such an unacknowledged sociology of failure in academic research? The present tendency is to design methods that involve an extremely large number of interviews and what I would call the “participatory approach fever”. The result of a misinterpretation of what “participation” should mean is subcontracting scientific evidence to researched subjects overburdened with theoretical expectations and over-theorizations, a tendency which seldom turns out to provide sound empirical evidence. In this vein, Northern-led research not only tends to romanticize the South, which would not be new in postcolonial scholarship, but increasingly invites the South to actively participate in its own romanticization. Affected by “participatory approach fever”, many scholars in the Global North feel urged to depict their work as local, while also missing the fact that sharing their own conscious positionality vis-à-vis the researched would instead be an invaluable point of departure in the effort to avoid ethical and scientific failure. Indeed, such a self-acknowledgment would finally contribute to nuancing the multiple cultures in which research design, data collection, writing, and knowledge production are embedded – cultures that are hardly definable within the categories of “North” and “South”.
In light of these considerations, I ask myself how ethnographic studies can survive without being sociologically relevant and, at times, even culturally appropriate. Subcontracting the production of knowledge either to local researchers or to the researched themselves is certainly not a one-size-fits-all answer. Yet it looks unfeasible for many researchers across the globe to dispose of proper time and funding to conduct research over a longer timeframe and develop a localized understanding of the contexts they wish to study. I identified a similar issue when I realized that some researchers who have a poor command of the local language shy away from hiring an interpreter due to a lack of material means or because they are in an environment that frowns upon social science researchers who lack contextual skills. While peacefully sharing one’s own limits and assets would potentiate empirical analysis overall, everyone wants to be the “voice of the Global South”. Instead, no one wants to be the Global North, impeding a honest sociology of knowledge. Thus, how do we decolonize sociological and anthropological knowledge and, at the same time, the sociology of knowledge, if the drivers of epistemological coloniality, across Norths and Souths, have managed to make themselves invisible?
Cambridge, 10th November 2017
We, the undersigned, categorically reject the malicious and totally unfounded allegations made against Dr Maha Abdelrahman in the Italian newspaper La Repubblica on 2 November 2017. Dr Abdelrahman, an internationally highly-regarded scholar at Cambridge University, was the supervisor of Giulio Regeni, an Italian PhD student, who was conducting research on Egyptian independent trade unions when he was abducted, tortured and murdered in early 2016. There is overwhelming evidence that strongly implicates the Egyptian security forces in Giulio’s murder. Indeed, Declan Walsh, the Cairo correspondent of the New York Times, wrote in August 2017 in a detailed account that the US had ‘incontrovertible evidence of official Egyptian responsibility’, but was unable to make the evidence public without compromising their source. Despite a cumulative body of facts pointing clearly to the Egyptian police, La Repubblica attempts to apportion some of the blame for Giulio’s murder to Dr Abdelrahman. The article lists the following questions that the Italian prosecutor wants to put to Dr Abdelrahman:
1. Who chose the specific theme of Giulio’s research? 2. Who chose the tutor to supervise Giulio’s fieldwork in Cairo? 3. Who chose the participatory research study method that Giulio pursued? 4. Who devised the research questions that were posed to the street vendors whom Giulio was interviewing? 5. Did Giulio submit the results of his research to Dr. Abdelrahman?
While we understand that some of these questions could be relevant to the Italian investigation, we find La Repubblica’s tendentious summary and analysis of them to be deliberately misleading. For example, La Repubblica alleges that Dr Abdelrahman ‘commissioned’ Giulio to work on a topic that she knew was dangerous and that he was reluctant to pursue. Furthermore, that she was the one who chose Giulio’s research topic, research methods, research subjects and research questions for him. We find these allegations absurd. They betray a fundamental ignorance of internationally-recognised procedures in applying for and undertaking a PhD. Academic supervisors do not choose their PhD students; rather, it is the students who choose them. PhD supervisors do not impose their research agendas on unsuspecting students; the students, usually, work on a particular research area for some time before undertaking a PhD and then look for a supervisor in that area. In Giulio’s case, he had been interested in independent trade unions for years and had already worked in Egypt before he even approached Dr Abdelrahman to be his supervisor. On the issue of the participatory research method employed by Giulio, any social scientist could tell you that it would be the method of choice in investigating contemporary issues. These and other allegations in the article are characterised by wilful ignorance, misrepresentation and distortion as well as pure invention and basic lies. Moreover, there is no way that Dr Abdelrahman, or anyone else, could have anticipated what happened to her student. The most egregious outcome that any foreign researchers in Egypt could have feared at the time of Giulio’s disappearance was the revoking of their research permit and deportation. Relying on hindsight, La Repubblica is insinuating that Giulio’s tragedy could have been foreseen. This is unequivocally not true. A final important point on which La Repubblica is incorrect. Dr Abdelrahman has NOT refused to talk to the Italian authorities. At Giulio’s funeral in February 2016, she was interviewed for one and a half hours by the Italian prosecutor. On 15 June 2016, she answered in writing many supplementary questions posed by the Italian prosecutor, and indicated that she was happy to answer any further questions. There was no further communication with the Italian authorities until recently when they put in the request referred to in La Repubblica’s article. In response, Dr Abdelrahman willingly agreed to be interviewed again. Giulio was not the author of his own tragedy. Nor was Dr Abelrahman responsible for his death in any way, shape or form. The responsibility for the abduction, torture and death of this bright Cambridge student falls squarely on the Egyptian regime. And it behoves serious investigative journalists to shine their light where the real darkness lies.
Cambridge signatories
Mahvish Ahmad, PhD student, University of Cambridge
Dr. Arthur Asseraf, Lecturer, History Faculty, University of Cambridge
Dr. Duncan Bell, Reader, Department of Politics and International Studies, (POLIS) University of Cambridge
Professor Bill Burgwinkle, Faculty of Modern & Medieval Languages, University of Cambridge
Dr. Adam Branch, Director, Centre of African Studies, University of Cambridge
Dr. Devon Curtis, Senior Lecturer, POLIS, University of Cambridge
Dr. Manali Desai, Lecturer, Sociology, University of Cambridge
Farida El Keiy, Language Teaching Officer, FAMES, University of Cambridge
Professor Khaled Fahmy, Faculty of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies (FAMES), University of Cambridge
Dr. Mónica Moreno Figueroa, Senior Lecturer in Sociology, University of Cambridge
Dr. Iza Hussin, Lecturer, POLIS, University of Cambridge
Dr. Solava Ibrahim, Affiliated Lecturer, Centre for Development Studies, University of Cambridge
Saussan Khalil, Lector in Arabic, FAMES, University of Cambridge
Professor Charles Melville, FAMES, University of Cambridge
Dr Perveez Mody, Lecturer, Department of Social Anthropology, University of Cambridge
Professor Clément Mouhot, Department of Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences, University of Cambridge
Dr. Basim Musallam, King’s College, University of Cambridge
Dr. Yael Navarro, Division of Anthropology, University of Cambridge
Dr. Rory O’Bryen, University Senior Lecturer in Latin American Literature and Culture, University of Cambridge
Dr. Yaron Peleg, Kennedy Leigh Reader in Modern Hebrew Studies, FAMES, University of Cambridge
Dr. Mezna Qato, Junior Research Fellow, King’s College, University of Cambridge
Dr. Helen Pfeifer, University Lecturer, Faculty of History, University of Cambridge
Dr. Glen Rangwala, Lecturer, POLIS, University of Cambridge
Dr. Sertaç Sehlikoglu, Abdullah Mubarak Al-Sabah Research Fellow, Pembroke College, University of Cambridge
Dr. Arathi Sriprakash, University Lecturer, Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge
Dr. Pieter van Houten, Senior Lecturer, POLIS, University of Cambridge
Dr. Njoki Wamai, Post Doctoral Research Associate, POLIS, University of Cambridge
Dr. Graham Denyer Willis, University Lecturer in Development Studies, University of Cambridge
Dr. Waseem Yaqoob, Lecturer, Faculty of History, University of Cambridge
Dr. Ayşe Zarakol, Reader in International Relations, POLIS, University of Cambridge
Non-Cambridge signatories
Dr. Giuseppe Acconcia, University of Padua,
Professor Gilbert Achcar, Professor of Development Studies & International Relations, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Nadje Al-Ali, Professor of Gender Studies, SOAS University of London
Dr. Lori Allen, Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Anthropology, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Francesca Biancani, Adjunct Professor, Bologna University and Postdoctoral fellow CEDEJ-IFAO, Cairo, Egypt
Anna Bilous, teaching fellow, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Sara Borrillo, University L’Orientale in Naples
Dr. Estella Carpi, Department of Geography, University College London
Prof. Anna Maria Di Tolla, University of Naples, L’Orientale
Dr. M. Cristina Ercolessi, Associate professor of African Studies at the University of Naples “L’Orientale”
Sai Englert, GTA in Politics and Development Studies, SOAS, University of London
Prof. Ersilia Francesca, Università degli Studi di Napoli “L’Orientale”
Professor Richard Fardon, Founding Head of the SOAS Doctoral School, 2012-16
Dr. Anna Maria Gentili, emeritus African history and Politics, University of Bologna
Dr. Laura Hammond, Reader, Dept of Development Studies, SOAS University of London
Emeritus Professor Mark Hobart, Centre for Global Media and Communications, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Adam Hanieh, Reader in Development Studies, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Feyzi Ismail, Senior Teaching Fellow, SOAS, University of London
Safa Joudeh, PhD candidate, SOAS, University of London
Professor Deniz Kandiyouti, Professor of Development Studies, Department of Development Studies, SOAS, University of London
Professor Laleh Khalili, Professor of Middle East Politics, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Lars Peter Laamann, Senior Lecturer, History Department, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Bridget O’Laughlin , retired associate professor of Population and Development, International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University, The Hague, The Netherlands
Dr. Hettie Malcomson, Associate Professor of Ethnomusicology, University of Southampton
Dr. Sandro Mezzadra, Università di Bologna
Dr. Satoshi Miyamura, Senior Lecturer, Department of Economics, Faculty of Law and Social Sciences, SOAS, University of London
Thomas van der Molen, PhD Student, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Andrew Newsham, Lecturer in International Development, Department of Development Studies & Centre for Development, Environment & Policy, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Daniela Pioppi, Associate professor, Contemporary history of Arab Countries, University of Naples ‘L’Orientale’, Italy
Dr. Paola Rivetti, Dublin City University, Ireland
Dr. Ruba Salih, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Ashwani Saith , Emeritus Professor, International Institute of Social Studies, The Hague, The Netherlands
Dr. Lucia Sorbera, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia
Dr. Barbara Sorgoni, University of Turin, Italy
Dr. Fabio Vicini, Assistant Professor of Sociology and Anthropology, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Istanbul 29 May University, Turkey
Professor Lynn Welchman, School of Law, SOAS, University of London
عن مفاهيم مصطلح “حرية”- صلاح أبو سيف “أنا حرة”
على ضوء تضييق مساحات ألمجتمع المدني
سارة فيرديري
مضى أسبوع ( 27 ديسمبر ) على الحكم الصّادر بالسجن بسنة و ثلاثة أشهر على النشطاء ماهينور المصري, لؤي القهوجي و الصحفي يوسف شعبان على خلفيّة أحداث “قسم الرّمل ” بالاسكندرية و يزداد بهذا الايقاف على النشطاء الثلاثة عدد المعتقلين الذّي تجاوز الاربعين ألف. محطّتان تاريخيتان مهمتان : الانقلاب العسكري في 30 يونيو 2013 و إصدار قانون التّظاهر في نوفمبر من نفس السّنة من ناحية و حلّ حزب العدالة والحرية في أغسطس 2014
بألإضافة إلى ذلك 250 ناشطا فقط بشهر أغوستس و سبتمبربناء على معطيات حملة أوقف الإختفاء القسري. و ليزداد الأمر سوء, تم اقتحام مقر دار مريت جاليري تاون هاوس ومسرح روابط من قبل شرطة المصنفات . يعتبر هذا القبض على النشطاء من قبل وزارة الدخلية كنتيجة لإرتفاع “الحرارة العسكرية” (مصطفى؛ فلاسوبولوس 2014) عند المجتمع المصري, حسب كلام المطرب المصري ياسر المناوهلي ” رجوع ريما لعداتها القديمة” . نتيجة لتلك الأحداث الأخيرة و بألإضافة إلى تضامني و مشاركتي المعنوية في فعاليات الحركة الثورية وأيضا البحث الذي قمت به في العامين السابقين نويت أن أكتب عن معنى مصطلح “حرية”. إذا تبنى هذه المقالة القصيرة على قضية إعاقة مساحات حرية المجتمع المدني بقمع النشطاء عبر مفاهيم و معاني “الحرية” كما يقدمها المخرج صلاح أبو سيف في فيلم “أنا حرة” (1959)
السجن و الحرية
و من المؤكد أن هناك إستمرار معين بإستخدام مصطلح “حرية” من خلال ال 18 يوما. و يدل هذا الإستمرار و الإهتمام على مطالبات الثوريين ب”كرامة حرية عدالة إجتماعية” ليتحول الى حملات من أجل حرية النشطاء المساجين عبر شعار “الحرية للجدعان” في القاهرة مثلا و “الحرية لماهينور في الإسكندرية ” أو كمنظمات الدفاع عن حقوق المرأة مثل”جنوبية حرة” في أسوان. يبدأ لي أن ما يحدث في الفترة الأخيرة هو تحوﱠل من المطالبة بالحرية للمجتمع ككل الى المطالبة بحرية شخص معين أو مجموعة من النشطاء. بالمناسبة تلاحظ الناشطة المحامية الكبيرة ماهينور المصري من زنزانتها في سجن دمنهور:
” يجب ألا ننسى هدفنا الأساسي وسط معركتنا التي نخسر فيها الأصدقاء و الرفاق , يجب ألا نتحول إلى مجموعات تطالب بالحرية لشخص و ننسى هموم مطالب الشعب الذي يريد أن يأكل. بجانب الهتاف ضد قانون التظاهر، يجب أن نعمل على الإطاحة بالنظام الطبقى، وأن ننظم أنفسنا ونتفاعل مع الشعب ونتحدث عن حقوق الفقراء وحلولنا لها، ونهتف بالحرية للفقراء حتى لا يشعر الناس أننا معزولون عنهم.” (22 مايو 2014)
ملاحظات ماهينور بالإضافة الى القبض “الصامت” الرهيب على الإسلاميين جعلني أفكرعن مفاهيم المصطلح من زاوية مختلفة و أطرح أسئلة جديدة
هل انا حرة؟
قبل أسبوع شاهدت فيلم كلاسيكي من الخمسينيات إسمه “أنا حرة” و يتحدث الفيلم على قصة حياة أمينة و هي مقيمة في القاهرة في فترة تنظيم الظباط الأحرار. ترغب أمينة في الحرية فوق كل شيء بأي شكل من الأشكال. بالمقابل ترفض أمينة العادات و التقاليد تجاه المرأة المسيطرة على تلك الفترة. تشك أمينة للمظات و تتمرد على الزواج المرتب كما تتمرد على الإنعزال في البيت و عدم الخروج مع أصدقاءها ورافضة لكل الشروط الإجتماعية التي ترد ان تختزل وظيفتها كربة بيت. تتوقع أمينة أن تحصل على “حريتها من خلال الدراسة و الشغل و الإستقلال المادي و هكذا تقررالتسجيل في الجامعة لإكمال دراستها و تبدأ الشغل في شركة كمؤظفة. بعدما حققت حلمها بالإستقلال المادي تقابل أمينة عباس و هو يشتغل صحافي متضامن مع حركة ضد الإستعمار البريطاني. فتشارك أمينة بالحركة مما سيؤدي إلى إعتقالها و عباس و حبسهما بيد القوات المسلحة. و في المشاهد الأخيرة تدخل أمينة صالة الزيارات في السجن للقاء عائلتها فتقول
“أرجوك يا عمي سمحني على كل المضايقات اللي سببتها أيام ما كنت أيه الحرية. أنا هتحمل هذا الحكم بصبر و سعادة لأنني صدئني دا دليل أنني حصلت على حريتى”
بعدما ناضلت أمينة من أجل الحرية كشفت أن في النهاية وجودها في السجن الذي يجعلها تشعر بالحرية الحقيقية! و أعتقد أن هذه المشاهد مثيرة للجدل بما تتعلق الحالة في مصر من زاويتن . أولا, الإطاحة بالنظام الطبقى و التضامن مع المظلومين من شباب الثورة والمعتقليين الإسلاميين كشرط لازم للحصول و الأحساس بالحرية – قد يشير الى هذه النقطة الناشط الكبير علاء عبد الفتاح عندما يتحدث عن مصالحة النظام و شباب الثورة ” شباب الثورة أضعف حالياً من أن يهتم النظام بمصالحتهم أو يعيرهم اهتماماً. وحتى لو افترضنا جدلاً أن هناك من يهتم بهم، فإنهم أضعف من أن تؤثر مثل تلك المصالحة على مجريات الأمور السياسية في البلاد، وأن تحدث تغييرا جوهرياً. والحالة الوحيدة التي يمكن الحديث عنها ذات جدوي، ويمكن فعلاً أن تكون مؤثرة (سلبياً أو إيجابياً)، هي المصالحة بين النظام والإسلاميين.” (18 أغوستس 2015)
ثانة, هل هو صحيح بالمطلق أن الإنسان المحبوس في السجن غير حر مقرانة بالإنسان الذي يعيش في البيت؟ أنا أتمتع بحقوق مدنية و قادرة على التجول في الشوارع و القرأة و اللقاء مع الأصدقاء و مع ذلك أشتاق الى الحرية مثل أمينة . و بينما أسأل هذا السؤال أتخيل المعتقل و الشاعر سميح القاسم يقول بنبرى استفزازيِة:
و من داخل زنزانتي الصغرى
أبصر زنزانتكن الكبرى.
الهوامش
Egypt court bans Muslim Brotherhood’s political wing http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28722935
صفحة حملة ” أوقفو الإختفاء القسري”
https://www.facebook.com/StopForcedDisappearence/
محمد هاشم: شرطة المصنفات عملت “فيلم”.. ولا أفهم سر اقتحامهم لـ”ميريت” – (حوار)
http://www.el5abar.com/تحقيقات/محمد-هاشم-شرطة-المصنفات-عملت-فيلم-ولا-أفهم-سر-اقتحامهم-لـميريت-حوار/
Anastasia Valassopoulos & Dalia Said Mostafa (2014), Popular Protest Music and the 2011 Egyptian Revolution, Popular Music and Society, Vol 37, No 5, pp.638-659
أنا حرة (1959) , نسخة كاملة , إخراج صلاح أبو سيف
رسالة ماهينور المصري الأولى من محبسها
http://revsoc.me/politics/29136/
علاء عبد الفتاح يتحدث من داخل السجن عن مصر والثورة والإسلاميين
http://www.huffpostarabi.com/2015/08/18/story_n_8000526.html
ضحايا الخاريطة
Saqi Books (1995)
Un’analisi che avevo scritto per ArabMediaReport su come vengono affrontate una serie di tematiche di carattere economico sui media egiziani e tunisini. Avevo discusso l’eventuale emersione di modelli economici alternativi a due anni dal rovesciamento dei rispettivi regimi.
Seppure non siano emersi veri e propri modelli alternativi al neoliberismo sull’onda delle rivoluzioni del 2011, il sistema economico dominante è oggetto di accesi dibattiti nei programmi televisivi dei Paesi in transizione.
Nel caso della Tunisia, l’indignazione di parte dell’opinione pubblica non è stata sufficiente a impedire un nuovo prestito del Fondo Monetario Internazionale (FMI). L’Egitto dei Fratelli Musulmani (2012-2013) ha invece cercato di perseguire una contraddittoria coesistenza tra finanza islamica e negoziati con il FMI, con l’esito comune di mettere a rischio la sovranità politico-economica. Con il ritorno de facto dei militari al potere a giugno del 2013, il Cairo ha congelato invece di declinato il prestito del FMI e ora sventola la bandiera di un’autarchia dal retrogusto nasseriano. Ciononostante, non sono pochi i segnali che fanno presagire un cambiamento di facciata senza adottare politiche sociali sostanzialmente differenti da quelle neoliberiste.
(…)
Un’analisi che ho scritto per ArabMediaReport sull’ascesa di Al-Jazeera English come media più professionale e meno parziale dell’ominima emittente panaraba.
Se Al-Jazeera English eclissa Al-Jazeera
Sono passati ormai diciassette anni dalla nascita dell’emittente satellitare panaraba Al-Jazeera (AJ), un progetto rivelatosi in grado di rivoluzionare una regione abituata alla rigida censura governativa. Nel 2006, una volta conseguita l’affermazione del canale quale fonte giornalistica più autorevole del mondo arabo, l’emirato del Golfo ha deciso di imporre il suo marchio nel club degli imperi mediatici anglofoni attraverso il lancio di Al-Jazeera English (AJE), originariamente nota con il nome di Al-Jazeera International.
Fin dall’inizio, l’emittente è stata oggetto di accese polemiche sia nel mondo arabo, preoccupato che l’obiettivo fosse uno smorzamento occidentalizzato delle posizioni anti-imperialiste, sia in Occidente, data la demonizzazione islamofoba attuata per anni dalle aree politiche conservatrici nei confronti del canale. Simili pregiudizi e l’ostracismo della concorrenza hanno finora relegato la popolarità di AJE tanto in Asia che in Africa e mettono ora a dura prova il successo di Al-Jazeera America appena sbarcata negli States.
La chiave del successo delle due emittenti anglofone del network del Qatar sui mercati europei e americani sarà la mobilitazione dell’opinione pubblica in favore della libertà d’espressione e del pluralismo mediatico, senza aspettarsi che l’orientamento trascenda il contesto mediorientale d’origine e venga meno alla missione di megafono del ‘sud globale’ [1].
L’altro lato della medaglia è il parallelo declino della credibilità di AJ, divenuta strumento della politica estera della famiglia reale al-Thani, in netto contrasto con la professionalità di AJE: il rischio è che il canale anglofono diventi un biglietto da visita dell’emirato al di fuori della regione, riducendo AJ a innocuo strumento di propaganda.
Perché Al-Jazeera English non ha mai inteso emulare la BBC o la CNN
Alla nascita di AJE, molti giornalisti di AJ avevano espresso il loro timore che il modello di resistenza mediatica, reso celebre dallo smascheramento dei crimini di guerra commessi dalle truppe statunitensi in Afghanistan e in Iraq, venisse filtrato dal team di giornalisti ‘importati’ da canali come la Bbc. Stando alla testimonianza di William Stebbins, caporedattore di AJE a Washington dal 2005 al 2010, il Ministero degli Esteri statunitense aveva promesso maggiore accessibilità alle fonti governative in cambio di pressioni sullo staff arabo ostile alla Casa Bianca.
Doha aveva subito resistito a un simile snaturamento dell’identità del marchio Al-Jazeera, promuovendo l’artefice del successo del canale arabo, il palestinese Wadah Khanfar, alla direzione generale del network televisivo; Khanfar aveva quindi provveduto a mutare il nome dell’emittente anglofona da Al-Jazeera International ad Al-Jazeera English, in un chiaro ridimensionamento delle aspirazioni dei ‘nuovi arrivati’. A dispetto dell’indipendenza da Doha sbandierata dall’ex-direttore amministrativo di AJE, Nigel Parsons, Khanfar ha cercato di mantenere l’emittente anglofona fedele alla missione di Al-Jazeera di essere una voce degli emarginati del “sud globale”.
Diversi analisti hanno però bocciato la professionalità di AJE, dando per scontato fosse stata concepita per ‘redimere’ i presunti eccessi anti-americani della ‘sorella’ araba. In questo senso, erano state emblematiche le dimissioni del 2008 di David Marash, celebre presentatore americano assunto da AJE, il quale aveva dichiarato di non identificarsi nella visione “araba e post-colonialista” del canale. Marash aveva dimostrato di non tenere così in alcuna considerazione l’orientamento del pubblico di AJE. Come messo in luce dagli studiosi di media Mohammad al-Nawawy e Shawn Powers, chi preferisce AJE alla Cnn o alla Bbc si distingue infatti per una posizione critica nei confronti della politica estera americana.
La chiave di lettura dell’orientamento di AJE risiede nelle teorie formulate da Kai Hafez [2], che considera gli spettatori un ‘elettorato’ piuttosto che un pubblico universale privo di idee pregresse. Nel contesto contemporaneo saturo d’informazione, i telespettatori cercano delle conferme delle loro convinzioni, quelli di AJE tanto quanto quelli della BBC.
La possibile via del successo per Al-Jazeera English in Occidente
Se finora i pregiudizi sul mondo arabo e alcuni calcoli di natura commerciale della concorrenza hanno limitato la popolarità di AJE negli States e in Europa, una piccola esperienza locale di successo può indicare le carte da giocare per assicurarsi il pubblico occidentale. Il dottorando William Youmans ha seguito in dettaglio il caso di un provider via cavo del Vermont (Usa), la Burlington TV, una delle pochissime piattaforme ad aver accettato di trasmettere AJE nel 2007, in un Paese dove l’emittente qatarense è riuscita ad assicurarsi un canale solamente quest’anno con l’acquisto di Current TV, l’emittente posseduta da Al Gore.
Si tratta di un caso particolare, in considerazione della natura semi-pubblica della Burlington TV, che è solita consultare i suoi telespettatori in quanto fruitori di un servizio, e dell’orientamento politico a favore del partito democratico prevalente nello stato del Vermont. Nel 2008, il fatto che alcuni residenti si fossero opposti alla trasmissione di Al-Jazeera ha spinto le autorità locali a indire una serie di dibattiti, a cui hanno partecipato cittadini e membri dello staff di AJE: in merito alle obiezioni avanzate dal fronte del ‘no’, è stato concluso che non vi fossero prove sufficienti né del contenuto anti-israeliano né dell’influenza della natura anti-democratica dell’emirato sul palinsesto. In nome della libertà d’espressione e del dialogo interculturale, il comune di Burlington ha deciso di non interrompere le trasmissioni di AJE.
Alcuni dei partecipanti al dibattito hanno confermato la validità delle teorie di Hafez sul pubblico inteso come ‘elettorato’ dalle posizioni predefinite, sminuendo l’eventualità che i telespettatori sviluppino tendenze anti-americane a causa di Al-Jazeera English. L’esperienza di Burlington potrebbe suggerire alla direzione di AJE e AJA la strategia migliore per guadagnare popolarità in Occidente, promuovendo dei dibattiti tra fasce di pubblico politicizzato e già incline alla ‘contro-informazione’.
Al-Jazeera English guadagna credibilità a spese di Al-Jazeera
Pur condividendo una visione contro-egemonica nei confronti dei media occidentali, il divario creatosi tra AJE e AJ in termini di credibilità è invece evidente in determinati contesti, Egitto e Bahrain in primis, dove la mano pesante dell’emirato ha condizionato la copertura degli eventi. A differenza della questione palestinese, dove l’insistenza di Doha nel mantenere dei buoni rapporti con Tel Aviv sin dal 1996 non ha condizionato la copertura del conflitto in senso filo-israeliano, la tutela dei legami con i Fratelli Musulmani e l’Arabia Saudita ha limitato la professionalità di AJ nell’occuparsi di Egitto e Bahrain.
Nel primo caso, i segnali della faziosità di Al-Jazeera Mubashir Misr (Al-Jazeera in diretta dall’Egitto- il canale creato ad hoc per seguire gli eventi egiziani) sono innumerevoli: basti constatare il dominio assoluto delle interviste a opinionisti a sostegno del deposto presidente islamista Mohammed Mursi sulla pagina YouTube del canale o la scelta di concedere oltre venti minuti al dotto islamico Yusef al-Qaradawi, da sempre vicino ai Fratelli Musulmani, per rivolgersi “al popolo egiziano” alla stregua di un presidente.
In merito invece al Bahrain, nonostante lo spazio concesso all’opposizione bahrainita anche su programmi di punta come Al-Ittijah Al-Mu’akis (La Direzione Opposta), la presa di posizione del canale al fianco della monarchia è palese in servizi come quello di Fawzi Bushra del 16 marzo 2011, dove l’insurrezione bahrainita viene definita “confusa” rispetto ai moti popolari egiziani e tunisini, in quanto divisa tra sciiti e sunniti.
Il Qatar, in qualità di membro del Consiglio di Cooperazione del Golfo (Ccg), ha acconsentito all’invio delle truppe del Dir’ al-Jazirah (Scudo della Penisola) in Bahrain il 14 marzo 2011 in supporto del regime. Come rivelato da un documento dell’ambasciata statunitense di Doha pubblicato da Wikileaks, al-Jazeera è riuscita a mediare la riconciliazione con l’Arabia Saudita nel 2010 attraverso una copertura favorevole della famiglia reale; Riyadh si è del resto collocata in prima linea nel supportare l’intervento in Bahrain, temendo pericolose ripercussioni nelle regioni sciite saudite.
Al contrario, AJE ha riservato maggiore spazio alla rivoluzione bahrainita, approfondita tramite un documentario intitolato ‘Shouting in the Dark’. In questo caso, il canale anglofono ha seguito una politica redazionale indipendente da Doha, evitando per esempio di applicare due pesi e due misure in Bahrain e in Siria, contesto quest’ultimo in cui AJ si è schierata apertamente con i rivoluzionari, omaggiandoli di una copertura continua degli eventi. L’intensità del conflitto esploso in Siria non legittima completamente la scala di priorità, considerata l’attenzione maggiore dedicata ai rivoluzionari pacifisti egiziani in confronto ai loro omologhi bahrainiti.
Le dimissioni di Wadah Khanfar del 2011 e la nomina alla direzione del network di un membro della famiglia reale senza alcuna esperienza giornalistica, Ahmad Bin Jassem al-Thani, avevano già suggerito un giro di vite delle élite qatariote. Un ulteriore passo indietro è stato il ripristino del Ministero dell’Informazione nel rimpasto ministeriale guidato dal nuovo emiro Shaykh Tamim Bin Hamad al-Thani, asceso al trono il 26 giugno scorso: tale ministero, da sempre utilizzato come strumento di controllo nel mondo arabo, era stato abolito dal padre Shaykh Hamad Bin Khalifa al-Thani in un gesto di apertura coinciso con il lancio di Al-Jazeera nel ’96. Lo stesso Khanfar aveva del resto motivato il suo abbandono sostenendo di aver portato a termine la sua “missione”, trasformando Al-Jazeera in un network internazionale d’informazione.
Ora che il Qatar è riuscito ad affermarsi come potenza, si trova immerso in un contesto costellato da realtà mediatiche intraprendenti quanto Al-Jazeera, emerse dalla caduta dei vari regimi (si pensi al ricco panorama satellitare iracheno): non trattandosi più di un’eccezione regionale, AJ potrebbe iniziare a essere percepita come realtà nazionale, chiamata a monitorare l’operato della classe dirigente. Secondo l’analisi dell’ex-caporedattore di AJE William Stebbins, l’emirato ha preferito limitare i danni e ripiegare su una missione molto meno ambiziosa di quella di Khanfar.
Nonostante dipenda finanziariamente dalle stesse casse e sia già stata oggetto delle pressioni di Doha, AJE sembra mantenere livelli superiori di professionalità. L’abdicazione volontaria di Shaykh Hamad, per esempio, è stata sì erta a “passo senza precedenti” [3] nella regione, ma senza scadere negli elogi sperticati dell’emittente araba, la quale non ha esitato a dedicargli una sezione speciale sul sito. AJE si è invece distinta mandando in onda una puntata di Inside Story (26 giugno 2013), in cui il corrispondente del The Guardian britannico, Ian Black, ha ricordato come il Qatar abbia prorogato di recente il mandato del Consiglio Consultivo, procrastinando ulteriormente le elezioni parlamentari. Sempre Inside Story (14 giugno 2013), ha dedicato un’altra puntata ai timori connessi allo sfruttamento dei lavoratori stranieri nei preparativi per la Coppa del Mondo di calcio, in programma a Doha nel 2020.
D’altro canto, come suggerito dall’ex-caporedattore Stebbins, le maggiori libertà concesse ad AJE potrebbero essere parte di una strategia volta a presentare un’immagine più liberale al pubblico anglofono esterno alla regione, mantenendo invece un controllo più rigido sul contenuto di AJ. Paradossalmente, considerando l’originale funzione di resistenza svolta nei confronti dei media occidentali, Al-Jazeera finirebbe per rassomigliare alla Cnn, di cui ai tempi della guerra in Iraq veniva criticata la disparità dei contenuti a seconda del pubblico: propaganda militarista per i telespettatori americani e commenti più sobri su Cnn International. Un’ Al-Jazeera lontana dagli albori da paladino della libertà d’informazione, rifondata sul consenso interno e le immagini edulcorate all’estero.
———————
Note
[1] Nelle parole di Ibrahim Helal, vice direttore delle notizie e dei programmi di AJE. Si veda: Mohammed el-Nawawy e Shawn Powers, Mediating Conflict. Al-Jazeera English and the Possibility of a Conciliatory Media [2008].
[2] Hafez, K. (2000) The West and Islam in the Mass Media: Cornerstones for a New International Culture of Communication in the 21st Century. Center for European Integration Studies Discussion Paper, 61, 3.
[3] In realtà esiste un precedente: il sultano dell’Oman Taimur bin Faisal bin Turki (1913 – 1932) abdicò infatti volontariamente in favore del primogenito.
(Fotografia di Piazza Tahrir, Cairo, Gennaio 2011: http://www.theatlantic.com)
http://vociglobali.it/2013/04/17/ma-quali-testi-accademici-imparare-la-rivoluzione-con-una-canzone/
Imparare la Rivoluzione da una canzone
Data 17 April 2013 di Redazione
[Nota: questo articolo è stato scritto da Sara Verderi, ricercatrice indipendente e traduttrice laureata in Lingua e Letteratura Araba all’Università di Bologna. Si legga anche questo suo precedente articolo scritto per Voci Globali.]
Due settimane fa mi sono recata al Cairo in occasione di un workshop dal titolo “Donne, Cultura e la Rivoluzione del 25 gennaio 2011” organizzato dall’Università di Manchester e dall’Università ‘Ayn alShams del Cairo. La prima sessione dello stesso workshop, a cui ho preso parte con un paper dal titolo “Donne scrivono la Rivoluzione in Siria”, si è tenuta a Manchester nel novembre 2012; la seconda, lo scorso marzo, ad ‘Ayn alShams, una delle università più conservatrici del Cairo che per la prima volta nella sua storia ha ospitato un simposio sulla Rivoluzione. Questo fatto ci fa capire il grado di apertura e democratizzazione delle istituzioni accademiche operato dall’ultima rivoluzione egiziana.
“Donne e attivismo politico in Egitto” il tema di questo workshop, nonché dei numerosi contributi di ricercatori, accademici e studenti, mentre a Manchester il dibattito si è concentrato sulle “Donne come artisti, scrittrici e la cultura delle resistenza”. Questa serie di incontri organizzati dalle due Università con il patrocinio del CBRL Research Support si sono concentrati sul ruolo delle donne nella Rivoluzione Egiziana, con lo scopo – afferma una delle organizzatrici, Dott.sa Dalia Mostafa – “di creare una teoria dal di dentro e non aspettare che venga da fuori”.
Arrivando al Cairo, in prossimità di Piazza Tahrir c’è una protesta ma senza canti né contenuti politici, qualcuno accende dei falò e dà fuoco alle tende stanziate in piazza, i passanti non prendono parte alla protesta e rimangono a osservare ai lati delle strade adiacenti. La Rivoluzione vissuta dal di dentro, come ben ho appreso nella mia esperienza in Siria o, in questo caso la post-rivoluzione, pur non essendo deprivata del suo aspetto glorioso e romantico assume tutte le fattezze di una realtà densa e angosciante, fatta di incertezze in una società tutta da ricostruire.
Siamo stati accolti all’Università da un team di studenti-receptionist che ci hanno assistito senza riposo con un ospitalità calorosa durante tutti i tre giorni rimanendo ai nostri occhi una presenza discreta e quasi invisibile. A volte la risposta agli interrogativi si trova sotto gli occhi e non si riesce a vedere. Dopo un intenso dibattito a cui hanno preso parte accademici e studenti da tutto il mondo nonché alcune giovani scrittrici egiziane come Mona Prince e Donia Kamal, il momento più importante è arrivato all’ultima ora della terza giornata. Quegli stessi studenti che ci avevano così gentilmente accompagnato da una stanza all’altra dell’Università, quasi presenze discrete e invisibili hanno preso il palcoscenico per dare vita a quella che è stata la loro Rivoluzione, la Rivoluzione dei giovani egiziani.
Le studentesse Gehad Minshawy e Mai Hassan Ali hanno emozionato il pubblico con una canzone dal titolo Yohka ‘Anna, ovvero “Si dice di noi” [cfr sopra] che parla del passato coloniale egiziano, palestinese e iracheno e del sentimento di riscatto storico dato dalla Rivoluzione. Poi è arrivato il video della studentessa Mina Wilson [riportato in fondo al post] che non ha bisogno di presentazioni ma che sicuramente riesce a testimoniare la coscienza di genere delle donne egiziane rivoluzionarie e della grandiosa esperienza che hanno vissuto da protagoniste nel gennaio 2011 e oltre.
Queste testimonianze valgono più di ogni dibattito accademico perchè ci insegnano e trasmettono il vero tesoro della rivoluzione egiziana, fatto di colori e gioia e che, nonostante il senso di incertezza, può offrire anche possibilità infinite per le nuove generazioni.
About the rivarly between Saudi Arabia and Qatar in the struggle for hegemony over the context shaped by the ‘Arab Spring’. This never got published, as it was due to appear on The Majalla, but the Saudi magazine is reluctant to publish features it considers detrimental to Saudi interests. It was written in May 2012
Qatar has been undoubtedly the leading actor of the Arab spring on the international scene. Doha finalized its bid for power started in 1996, when Al-Jazeera was founded and Shaykh Hamad Bin Khalifa al-Thani overthrew his father in a silent coup. The tiny emirate provided a powerful media platform for Tunisian, Egyptian, Libyan and Syrian revolutionaries and further consolidated its financial support for the different branches of the dissident Muslim Brotherhood (MB), banking on their electoral success. On the other hand, Qatar remained fully aware that political turmoil was in its interests as long as it wasn’t a threat to Gulf monarchies, therefore it agreed on the deployment of GCC troops in Bahrain to help the Sunni ruler resisting a Shi’a uprising.
While cultivating its dreams of expansion, the emirate has always been living under the Saudi shadow. Even Al-Jazeera became wary of annoying Riyadh and was allowed to open its offices in the kingdom last January, only after allegedly toning down the coverage in the last years. However, the future of Qatar’s political leverage in the region is highly dependent on its will to challenge Saudi Arabia by maintaining good ties with the MB and the Iranian camp. At the same time, Doha needs to balance carefully interferences in post-revolutionary contexts to avoid cleavages between its Islamist allies and their rivals.
For what concerns the low profile competition with Saudi Arabia, Egypt is a particularly crucial context. Although tracking down the foreign funds received by both the MB and the Salafi Al-Nour Party is particularly difficult, due to their recent history as legal political forces, the Qataris- and Turkey’s ruling AKP- have been focusing on the Brotherhood, whereas the Saudis preferred sponsoring the Salafi newcomers. Former MB leader Sayyid ‘Abdul-Sattar al-Malija claims $95 million have been received by the Brotherhood from Qatar for the parliamentary elections. Saudi Prince Talal Bin ‘Abdul-Aziz al-Sa’ud denied Government funds have been channeled to Al-Nour, but he didn’t exclude financial support coming from Saudi Salafis. In the end, Wahhabism, the Saudi branch of Salafism, is a homebred version of apolitical Islam the Sa’ud family has always been keen on exporting, whereas the originally militant Islamism promoted by the Egyptian MB and its ties with Iran have often been perceived as a threat. Riyadh would have clearly preferred Mubarak to stay and relations with Egypt are already tense, after demonstrators assaulted the Saudi embassy in Cairo, protesting against the arrest of an Egyptian lawyer in the kingdom.
Bearing in mind the dependence of the Egyptian military from the US, the MB is not left without any alternative to Saudi Arabia, as Iran is just waiting around the corner: the former head of Tehran’s political bureau in Cairo, Sayyed Hadi-Khosrow Shahi, called on the Iranian authorities to be patient, because once the military junta will be handing over its powers- if it ever will- the MB will be the first party interested in establishing new relations with Tehran. After all, Iran has been waiting for this moment for the last thirty years.
In this context, Qatar is in a really favorable position, taking into account its ties with Iran and the influence held over the most prominent expatriate of the Egyptian MB, Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi. The Sunni cleric is significantly indebted to the emirate, where he was granted Qatari citizenship, after fleeing from Nasserist Egypt in the ‘60s. Qaradawi is known for his political opportunism, the leftist Lebanese-American professor As’ad Abu Khalil said of him that he “would subtract a daily prayer if ordered to do so by the Emir who sponsors him”. The Brotherhood’s spiritual guide has been functional to Qatari interests for a long time, being also one of the pillars of Al-Jazeera’s popularity, but to which extent is the emirate willing to jeopardize its relations with other Gulf countries, by following the Brotherhood’s emboldened political status? A significant episode was the quarrel between Qaradawi and the head of Dubai’s police, Dahi Khalfan: the latter was attacked virulently by the Egyptian Brotherhood’s spokesperson, Mahmud Ghozlan, who threatened to mobilize the Muslim world against the Emirates, after Khalfan dared attacking Qaradawi for his criticism on the UAE’s alleged deportation of several Syrian protesters. What if this is only the beginning and the MB will feel entitled again to raise its voice against Gulf countries? The Emirates and Saudi Arabia are not likely to stand on the side of the Egyptians and the Qataris might be asked to take distances from Qaradawi, but what if they refuse and choose to defy their neighbors? Doha’s leadership needs to ponder over its choices, but it clearly doesn’t lack ambitions.
Tunisia is another political battlefield, where the Qataris are more in the position to pull the strings than the Saudis, taking in consideration their ties with both the ruling Al-Nahda Movement – the closest to the Brotherhood, ideologically speaking – and its supporters in Tehran. In Cairo and Tunis, the Brotherhood and al-Nahda have been struggling for decades against Western-sponsored autocrats, hence they pursued good relations with the Iranian camp. In April, the Central Bank of Tunisia received a half a billion dollars loan from Doha.
Qatar and Saudi Arabia are more likely to act hand in hand in Syria, where the Syrian MB is opposed to a regime closely allied to the Iranians, thus earning the Saudi support under any circumstances. However, the main political body of the Syrian Brotherhood, the Syrian National Council (SNC), is rapidly losing popularity among revolutionaries for its little achievements, whereas Salafi trends are gaining wider support in an increasingly sectarian confrontation with Alawis. If Asad will be overthrown, figures like the Saudi-based Syrian Salafi preacher ‘Adnan al-‘Ar’ur and his followers could rely on Riyadh’s support to enter politics. This would open room for confrontation with Doha’s favorites in the SNC.
Besides the possibility of triggering Saudi concerns, Qatar is facing an equally serious risk of splitting post-revolutionary contexts by favoring certain parties over the others. In an interview I had with Samir Nashar, one of the members of the SNC executive committee, he motivated his rejection of the extension of Burhan Ghalioun’s presidential mandate, by claiming it was dictated by foreign pressures possibly coming from Qatar. Already in November, the former Libyan Prime Minister Mohammad Jibril accused Doha of promoting the rise of some rebel factions. In Algeria, according to secular parties, Islamists received Qatari financial support for their recent electoral campaign. The Egyptian presidential candidate and former member of the Brotherhood, ‘Abd al-Mun’im Abu al-Futuh, has been targeted with similar allegations. In Yemen, the independent MP Ahmad Sayf Hashid blamed the local MB branch, the Reform (Islah) Party, of being more despotic than the ousted President ‘Ali ‘Abdallah Saleh and he accused the bloc of using Qatari funds to win over its foes. The Qatari selective support has become an increasingly common reason for attacking political rivals and it could be enough to question electoral results and stir up violence.
“Qatar is reacting to the fact that the traditional heavy-weights in the Middle East – namely Egypt and Saudi Arabia – are not playing their customary roles”, explained the veteran correspondent of the New York Times, Anthony Shadid, “there is a political void in the region that both Qatar and Turkey to some extent have stepped into”. The continuation of Qatar’s rise to power is largely dependent on its skills to carefully erode Saudi regional hegemony and weigh out interferences in the countries of the Arab awakening.
Blog di Asmae Dachan "Scrivere per riscoprire il valore della vita umana"
Update on Syria revolution -The other side of the coin ignored by the main stream news
Sguardi Globali da una Finestra di Cucina al Ticinese
Views on anthropological, social and political affairs in the Middle East
A blog about understanding humanity- by G. Marranci, PhD
Views on anthropological, social and political affairs in the Middle East
"... chi parte per Beirut e ha in tasca un miliardo..."
[was] appunti e note sul mondo islamico contemporaneo
Views on anthropological, social and political affairs in the Middle East
Ho sempre immaginato che il Paradiso fosse una sorta di biblioteca (J. L. Borges)