The Voice Of Reason Between Saudi
Arabia And Egypt
21 May 2012
By Dr.
Hamad Al-Majid
Imagine if all Arab
people were asked which of the following two
situations is better: A young man sees his friend
quarreling with someone. The first situation sees him
intervene to fight his friend's opponent before he
even inquires about the situation. The second
situation sees the young man separating the two
fighting sides and then inquiring about the cause for
such hostility. He then makes a judgment either by
placing the blame on one of them or holding them
accountable together, but to different extents.
Certainly, everyone would rationally answer that
second display of conduct is far better.
The case of Ahmed al-Gizawi,
whom the Saudi authorities allege entered their
country with a sizable amount of prohibited narcotic
pills, is yet to be prosecuted. Nevertheless, in the
manner of "street fighting", mistakes have been
committed by two narrow categories on both the Saudi
and Egyptian sides. On the Egyptian side, it was a
fatal mistake for some demonstrators to attack the
premises of the Saudi Embassy, a manner of conduct
that no religion, custom or law would sanction even if
a guilty verdict was passed upon al-Gizawi by the
Saudi judiciary. How on earth could such uncivilized
conduct be justified when the Saudi judiciary is yet
to pass a sentence? On the Saudi side, the mistake has
been limited to the irresponsible words and
descriptions posted on social networking websites,
which incorporated unfair generalizations blaming the
Egyptian majority for the errors committed by a
minority.
The situation would
have remained manageable had it been limited to the
reactionary and irrational minority, which could exist
in any nation in the world. Yet, the real catastrophe
occurred when a handful of intellectuals and
columnists on both sides used utterly obscene racist
words that added fuel to the fire of hostility. The
Saudi and Egyptian people had the misfortune of the
al-Gizawi incident coinciding with the feverish
Egyptian presidential elections, which meant that the
issue was soon exploited by those seeking only to win
the greatest number of votes. One of those
presidential candidates was Amr Musa, who demanded
that al-Gizawi be released, although he is aware that
the case is yet to be taken to court. Similarly, the
Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party claimed
that the masses who demonstrated in front of the
premises of the Saudi Embassy over the past few days
have only expressed the people's desire to maintain
the dignity of the Egyptian expatriate community in
other Arab states, yet the party failed to condemn the
attack on the embassy itself.
The silver lining of
this issue is that a broad category on the Egyptian
side has requested in a civilized manner that the
Saudi authorities grant al-Gizawi the right to a fair
trial with a lawyer to defend him. At the same time,
this category has condemned what a small minority of
the Egyptian people did in front of the Saudi embassy.
Similarly, there is also a broad category of Saudi
people who saw the attack on their embassy as an act
of aggression limited to a handful of people,
maintaining their love and appreciation for the
Egyptians in general, and also attacking those Saudis
who made generalizations and unfair judgments.
Unfortunately, the small minority that used
reactionary phrases and racist terminology seems to
have the louder voice.
Dr. Hamad Al-Majid is a journalist and former
member of the official Saudi National Organization for
Human Rights. Al-Majid is a graduate of Imam Muhammad
Bin Saud Islamic University in Riyadh and holds an
M.A. from California and a Doctorate from the
University of Hull in the United Kingdom.