COMMON SENSE
Hassan Al-Haifi
The importance of good leadership in steering any country on the right track towards security, economic welfare and sound regional and international relations can never underestimated. For a country like the United States of America, the significance of good leadership becomes more paramount, in view of the international repercussions that cannot be ignored and which arise from everything and anything that happens in that giant urbane nation.
Just before the turn of the last century, the United States enjoyed one of those phenomenal periods of great leadership in the White House. It was a period, in which the United States was masterly in handling its own domestic affairs and assuming its international leadership position with a great sense of responsibility and a true feeling for the mission that must be borne by the world's mightiest superpower, as well as the largest producing and consuming nation. Last week, there were members of the last White House Administration of President William Clinton, who finally came out to speak their minds against the fumbles and staggering of the present Administration in the White House, in order to ensure that the legacy of the Clinton Presidency lingers on and does not get thrown out the window by immature heirs, who even failed to carry on with some of the unfinished commendable work of that legacy. It was with noticeable appreciation that we have seen some of the leading figures in the Clinton Administration come out last week come out and speak their minds about the recent holocaust being instigated by no other than the chauvinist Zionist mongrel Ariel Sharon in the Holy Land. For sure, their anger was more directed at the lack of vision and compassion, which can be seen by the way the present US Administration has dealt with the Middle East problem. Moreover, the gullibility to which US foreign policy has become subjected to, as it caters to the sadistic cravings of a renowned butcher as he wreaks havoc in the Holy Land was just too much for some of the Clinton officials. Understandably, the Clinton Administration has a lot to be credited for in the domestic front and in the international arena. Therefore, it would be right that these officials would come out and say, "Hey, what is the present US Administration doing to all that fine work we left behind?"
Yes the Clinton Administration left a record of legacy in giving America its most prosperous times, with noticeable progress achieved in all the economic, social and cultural fronts. Internationally, the Clinton Administration showed clear understanding of the need for American leadership in steering the world in the directions of peace, international cohesion and responsibility towards alleviating the major mitigating circumstances that are bringing so much suffering to a majority of the world's citizens, such as oppression, poverty and social decay. On the other hand, the initiatives introduced in international affairs, such as involving and leading the international to relieve the Balkans of the horrors that were unleashed by the mastermind of modern European terror, manifested by the massacres in Bosnia and Kosovo, Slobodan Melosovitch. On the other hand, the handling of the Middle East problem, while it did not reach the desired results of a permanent lasting peace, still kept that region out of any major difficulties and relieved the Palestinians of Zionist bigotry and hostility for eight years.
Once the Clinton Administration left, the American Presidency was left in the hands of a young somewhat naïve leadership. The American Presidency seemed like a monarchy inherited by a spoiled crown prince, who lacked the acumen and the foresight to at least carry on with all the fine work the previous Administration left, which was worthy of following through with. Rather than that, this Administration preferred to choose an orientation that seemed dictated by prejudice and overreaction and a poor sense of moral and conscientious responsibility, an important element of international leadership. Leadership cannot be based on continuous backtracking to try to correct all the fumbling dictated by narrow and emotional passions, which reflect naivete and poor taste rather than global power responsibility. One wonders what Mr. Bush would have done to deal with such difficult issues like the Irish civil unrest, which his predecessor has cleared out of his way. Take care, Mr. Clinton, we still remember you well.

Saadi Salama
Palestinian Diplomat in Sana'a
Events in Palestine and Israel during the past week have raised some interesting questions, specifically, how long has Israel wanted to eliminate Palestine?
These questions might be premature, but here are more questions waiting for answers: did the Israeli society decide to delete the other side of the equation, the Palestinians? Or did it decide for coexistence with the Palestinians? Is the Israeli society ready for a peaceful living or it had prepared for a continuous violence and bloodshed?
Whatever the answers may be, it’s certain that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s failure has became so public that he should abandon his visions and retire.
He has practiced his terror for too long, during his long bloody history in the military. Now he has managed to lead the Israeli society to economic deterioration, disaster and loss of trust.
The Jewish society should monitor and question his performance during the remaining time of his term. The former general may not admit his failure that is leading Israeli society to a dead end crisis, but whether he admits it or not, the question remains, who will come after him?
And the question remains if Israel will remain trapped inside this former general’s misleading policy.
No nation can eliminate another nation. This is what we have learned from experience. The loss of life and property on both sides enforces this conclusion.
The differences between the two major political parties in Israel, the Labor party and the Likud party, are minor. They have the same vision in terms of building and widening the settlements in the Palestinian lands.
The only difference is that the Likud party leads arrogantly out in the open, while the Labor party operates under cover and discretely.
It is not up to the Palestinians to decide for the Israelis whether they want to live in peace according to the international policy or not. Choosing peace means taking action on the ground.
The Israelis have tried. Their previous leader Benjamin Netanyahu led them to disasters, terror, violence and misunderstanding, to the point that regional and international changes led to his fall. Then Barak came with all his decorations as a military general.
He built more settlements in the Palestinian lands and headed for the negotiating table believing that he could do it alone. But then he failed like Netanyahu, so both paved the road for Sharon to become prime minister.
Sharon was elected by the extreme right wing together with those disappointed with Netanyahu’s and Barak’s parties, and the extreme fanatic religious Jews. He came to power decorated by his bloody history, carrying his thirst for terror and massacre. Is this the Israeli society’s will?
This question is vital because it comes right after the Palestinian killings that started with Barak. It is urgent because it comes after many promises which have just managed to increase the violence and the counter violence.
Neither Sharon nor chief of staff Mofaz can win the battle, because in order to win, they need to erase the Palestinians, or they have to change their understanding of the situation.
Maybe some analysts are correct in their belief that a new Israeli leadership will emerge from the departing members of the two major parties, a leadership that might be able to adopt the second choice, that is coexistence with the Palestinians based on mutual respect and the international legitimacy. Let’s hope so.

Alain MARIE,
Kuala Lumpur-Malaysia
I became furiously interested in Yemen after reading “The Southern Gates of Arabia” by Freya Stark (1934), which has a long and interesting description of the people and cultures of Hadhramaut.
I regret that so-called Westerners like myself (I am a French citizen who has lived in Malaysia for more than 8 years and tries to understand the teachings of Islam, the official religion of Malaysia) are too often confused with any westerners, particularly Americans who obviously strongly support enemies of the Arab World.
I would like to inform the People of Yemen that we, Westerners, are not all like so many Americans, hating everything Arab and blindly supporting the Israelis. On the contrary, I personally support most actions in favor of the Arab countries.
I am impressed by the reactions of the Government of Yemen. Although Yemen is not a very rich (financially) country, it does not fall in the American trap of trying to buy over a country allegiance in exchange for reduced debts.
It is regrettable that many Arab countries have not been as wise as Yemen. Again recently, President Ali Abdullah Saleh confirmed Yemen’s position against Israel’s invasion of Palestine and the silence from the Arab World.
Since the beginning of the 20th century, Americans have repeatedly shown that they want to keep the Arab World under their control. “Divide to rule” has been the very same strategy used over and over.
It is to be hoped that the entire world of Arab countries will wake up someday, agree to work together and tell the Americans not to interfere anymore in their own politics. Over the last hundred years, the Americans have shown that:
. they are biased in favor of Israel,
. they love to get involved with what is not their business and impose their will,
. do not hesitate to bribe countries to buy allegiance,
. have very limited understanding of the Arab World,
. start a war overseas when their economic situation goes down to boost up their economic growth,
. do not count the same way as other people do: There have been more civilians killed by American bombings in Afghanistan than in the Sept. 11 events. There have been more Palestinian civilians casualties by the Israeli army than Israeli casualties by Palestinian suicide bombings. Why can’t the US government see it this way?
Well, that was my piece to the People of Yemen. It is not meant to support or encourage any killing of anyone by anyone.
The efforts of the government of Yemen are very much appreciated and congratulated not only by the Arab community but also by Westerners. If this opinion piece can serve in supporting the continued action of the Government of Yemen and change the idea that all Westerners are bad, I’ll be happy enough.

Emad al-Saqqaf
Taiz Bureau Chief
In an attempt to cope with the changes shaping all aspects of our world, it’s easy to allow ourselves to be manipulated by people and forces that go against our principles.
We shouldn’t let that happen, especially when it comes to our notion of patriotism.
The concept of patriotism, a good one to begin with, has, regrettably, been used by some evil-doers to suppress their opponents, to label them as extremist, fanatic and treacherous.
It seems the true spirit of patriotism has vanished in our country. And when that happened, it set the stage for a farce whose heroes are supposedly “patriots.”
This is reflected in the public who now believe somehow that patriotism is something fraudulent and selfish. The public have seen people use so-called patriotism for corrupt and disgusting purposes by people bearing the banner of injustice and devastation instead of peace and goodness.
Islam stresses the importance of serving one’s homeland and one’s country rewards its citizens with sacred goals that are an integral part of believing.
Political systems and ideologies and organizations have been altered in ways that made people share different opinions on the issue of patriotism. Still, will have to think of developing and preserving our country in a way that protects us from some fanatic ideologies that reinforce the concept of individualism and sectarianism.