Three cups of controversy

Craig Mortensen, who wrote the best selling book, THREE CUPS OF TEA, is finding himself steeping in controversy these days. He visited Vero Beach on one of his book tours and created a lasting impression of his efforts in Afghanistan to bring education to the country's impoverished children, especially girls.The only reason I am writing about this now is that back when he visited our area, he insisted that no one else could duplicate what he has done because of his special relationship with the people of Afghanistan. That was a red flag to me.

Although I have never visited Afghanistan, I have spent plenty of time in Africa and the Middle East, especially with tribal people, to know that they are just like people anywhere. They are suspicious at first of people who come to 'help' them, but once they get to know you are sincere, you are welcome like family. I have two friends here locally who served in Afghanistan, one a medic, the other a soldier, who could not say enough about the friendliness of Afghanis, especially when they feel you are sincere in your efforts on their behalf.

So as to Craig Mortensen's alleged position that only he could develop this relationship, I can only surmise he was doing something he didn't want widely known. This past week we found out the possible explanation. A segment on last Sunday's SIXTY MINUTES news program presented numerous conflicting accounts of Mortensen's accomplishments, including questions about the finances of his charity, the Central Asia Institute as well as the claim he was kidnapped by the Taliban back in the 90s. These allegations and Mortensen's defense of them can be found by googling his name and/or THREE CUPS OF TEA, so I won't repeat them here.

The point is that in today's shrinking world, people can travel just about anywhere and see for themselves how people live. If they don't travel, they can still find out anything they want to know by clicking on to the internet.  There are a billion cell phones in the world, all capable of filming life as it really happens and uploading it to YouTube, Facebook or even blogs like this one.

So my advice to Mr. Mortensen and others who achieve fame and fortune: be careful because we are watching you.

Who started all this trouble in the Middle East anyway?

If you have ever seen the great movie, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, you know the primary source of our problems in the Middle East today. Essentially, the Ottoman Turks conquered all of what we know as the Middle East and subjected it for about 400 years. When World War I started, the Ottomans sided with Germany. The British sent T. E. Lawrence, an Arabic scholar, to organize the local Arab tribes in a revolt against the occupying Ottomans. In return, the Arabs were promised freedom and self rule. After the Arabs and Lawrence of Arabia routed the Ottomans, they went to Damascus to form a new free government. The British and French however, had already decided to divide up the Ottomans' former territory (the Sykes-Pecot Agreement) and prevented the Arabs from proceeding. All the Middle Eastern countries we know today - Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon -  were created in 1922 as a way for the French and British to divide the spoils. The British also created Afghanistan in 1823 and Pakistan in 1947. Thank you very much.

Apparently, when Mr. Sykes and Monsieur Pecot drew up their map they were more interested in geography than sociology. Iraq, for instance, was cobbled together to include Kurds, Shi'ites and Sunnis, three groups not inclined to share a tent, much less a country. The Kurds are a separate ethnic group, yet the British and French gave them no country of their own, instead dividing them up into Iraq, Turkey and Iran, where they have caused constant trouble for those three governments ever since. The Shi'ites and Sunnis have fought for 700 years, so there was no reason to expect they would stop arguing as a favor to the British who forced them to share a common border. The British had all kinds of problems in Iraq as a result, successive governments with successive coups. The only time in its short history that Iraq existed in relative peace was under Saddam Hussein. He figured correctly that fearing him would keep them from fighting each other. When we went into Iraq and successfully removed Saddam, well, you know the rest.

Afghanistan? The brilliant British cartographer who laid out that map must have suffered from geographical dyslexia with its 20 some odd nationalities, languages, rivalries and only 12% arable land, most of which is used to grow poppies for export as heroin to the US and Europe. Actually, the best chance Afghanistan ever had to succeed economically was when the country extended south to the Indian Ocean. But again, in their infinite wisdom, when the British gave India its freedom they had to resolve the long-standing conflict between Indian Hindus and Muslims, so they created Pakistan as a Muslim homeland. Only problem was, they created it out of southern Afghanistan, eliminating its only route to the sea and insuring that Afghanistan, Pakistan and India would never share so much as a cup of sugar.

The proverbial last straw in this successful effort to alienate forever Arabs everywhere goes to the United Nations. Not satisfied with betraying the Arabs and just about every other ethnic group in the Middle East after World War I, The UN "graciously" agreed to give the Jewish people a homeland after World War II and created the State of Israel. Of course, Israel was created out of the existing Palestinian Arab homeland.

So there you have it folks, the mess we call "The Middle East," brought to you by two of our closest allies. With friends like that we don't need enemies, but unfortunately, we have those too.

Why should we care about Libya?

I've never visited Libya, though it is not my fault. First of all you might ask why I would even go there. Well, if you are interested in ancient history as I am, there are numerous World Heritage sites there. I am also interested in World War II, and Libya is where Rommel (The Desert Fox) and Montgomery fought several key battles of the war (Tobruk, Benghazi). I am also interested in the Middle East generally and have visited most countries in the region, so Libya was definitely on my bucket list.

I was scheduled to fly from Cairo to Tripoli but the flight - and the tour - were cancelled as I sat in the airport hotel waiting for my ride to the terminal. I called the US embassy because the rumor was that Ghaddafi's son was denied a US visa so he retaliated by barring Americans traveling to Libya. Something as eccentric as that was not outside the realm of possibility for those who knew Ghaddafi. The duty officer called me back after talking to the US embassy in Tripoli to say there was no problem they were aware of. In fact, there were 30,000 Americans in Libya at that moment who had come to see the solar eclipse days earlier. So it turns out, Ghaddafi had nothing to do with my cancelled trip. It was the Libyan tour operator who decided to keep our money (I was traveling with six other people) and use it for something other than our trip. That's an example of how Quixotic doing business in Libya can be.

So why care about what's happening in Libya now? Ordinary citizens are revolting all over the Middle East, encouraged by what happened in Tunisia and Egypt. Every country in that region is ruled by autocrats trying to reign in their citizens who are fed up with the corruption, fear, unemployment and general stagnation resulting from autocracies in an age of free enterprise and democracy. The most violent revolt has been in Libya, where the mercurial Ghaddafi has no problem killing thousands of his own people to maintain power. In Tunisia and Egypt, their armies refused to fire on fellow citizens. That's not the case in Libya, where Ghaddafi maintains his fiefdom with billions in oil revenues, paying soldiers loyal only to the paycheck he provides. The bottom line is this -- if Ghaddafi succeeds in putting down this rebellion without the US or any other industrialized nation helping the rebels, it sends precisely the wrong message to people and governments in the neighboring autocracies -- if your people revolt and you do nothing, they will succeed. If you massacre your people, we and the rest of the world will do nothing and you will succeed.

If we do nothing in the face of these massacres, the rebels, having lost hope, will turn to fundamentalist groups for help in ridding them of their discredited leader. These groups, supported by Iran and other countries friendly to terrorists, will gladly supply weapons and bombs to get rid of Ghaddafi and other Arab autocrats. They will then turn Libya and other countries into little Irans, where we will have no influence and a heightened risk of terror within our own borders. The people of Libya know this is the risk. They would much prefer to be free of tyrannical regimes and prosper in western style capitalistic societies. But even a fundamentalist regime to them is preferable to their current regime and worth the risk.

So, fellow Americans, if you liked the Middle East under Ghaddafi-like dictators, you will love the Middle East filled with terrorist states bent on our destruction.

Egypt update Feb. 12

When you think about it, 18 days of protesting is all it took to rid Egypt of a 30-year dictator. I have been going to Egypt since 1992 listening to complaints about 'the regime' and nothing happened. I guess it's because Facebook had not been invented!

Now comes the hard part -- creating a multi-party system when all opposition has been systematically crushed for those same 30 years. This neonatal democracy will depend for its existence on the military, not a typical standard bearer of democratic ideals. The Egyptian military has produced all three of the country's ex-presidents as well as many of its appointed and 'elected' officials. The top military brass own at least 20% of the country's major private companies. How they shepherd the country through this period is anyone's guess at this point.

The primary concern of average working class Egyptians is having good paying jobs and a future for their children. Whatever it takes to make that happen is acceptable to them, even if the military runs the show. For young adults however, college educated with no jobs, democracy means having a say in how government operates and having leaders who think the same way. The average age in Egypt, and for that matter in the Middle East as a whole, is late teens or early 20s.That is who started this revolution and they are intent on seeing it through.

Egypt's more serious problem is...

Regardless of how the situation in Egypt turns out, unless the country addresses it's most serious problem, things are bound to get worse. That problem is overpopulation. In 1961, Egypt had 10 million hectares of arable land and 15 million people. They were a net exporter of foodstuffs. (Egypt had been the breadbasket of the Roman Empire and its successors.) Today, Egypt has 11 million hectares of arable land and 80 million people! That number continues to grow at the rate of about a million every nine months. And where are those people going to live? There are laws preventing construction on farmland (unless you have the money to bribe a government official), so the only option is for people to build on their existing homes. Keep in mind that 95% of Egypt is the Sahara Desert and 95% of the population lives on 5% of the land. The country is now a net importer of grain and other staples, so much of their cash goes to feeding its people. Not only that, the bread Egyptian bakeries bake from that grain is government subsidized so the people pay about a penny a loaf.

History has shown that the only way to slow population growth is to provide education and good paying jobs. Having a large family was acceptable, even necessary when farmers needed plenty of help growing and harvesting crops. You don't need a large family cramped up in a small apartment in a Cairo slum with one wage earner bringing home enough money each day so the family can eat that day.

'Be fruitful and multiply' might be a Bible directive (and yes, Muslims have the same Bible), but back when the Bible was written, world population of humans amounted to about 100 million. Now it's seven billion. Let's not be so fruitful.

On  the positive side, the Egyptian people have a great deal of national pride. They are the only nation in the Middle East intact for 6,000 years while most other nations were created by the British or French in the 20th century. They love American culture and people (not so much the American government), they are industrious (I have rarely run into people looking for handouts) and highly family oriented. But deep in Cairo's morbidly overcrowded slums, where poverty and hopelessness abound, the promises of religious fundamentalism can override any sense of pride. The question to ask there is what kind of economic miracle in this desert country could generate the jobs these million new residents need every nine months.

Where is Egypt now?

A lot has happened since my last entry, or possibly nothing at all. First, let me set the stage. Egypt is and has been for more than 50 years a military dictatorship. The three presidents who have ruled Egypt since 1952 (when Gamal Nassar kicked out King Farouk) were all generals. The cabinet positions today are at least half filled with former generals.Of the country's 17 governates (like states in the US), 80% of the governors are ex-generals. While that may sound ominous when compared to our civilian government, each president has done good things for Egypt and as I have said before, if they simply retired after two terms like here, things would be much better for Egyptians today. Unfortunately, any government official in office more than 8-10 years ends up making decisions designed to keep him in power. That usually includes bribery, patronage, intimidation, etc.

So here's the situation now. Former general Suleiman, named vice president by former general Mubarak, is taking the lead to come up with a package of reforms designed to satisfy the Egyptian people - free and fair elections (as long as it keeps the military in control), free press (except for those who disagree with the military), multi-party dialogue (without any strong opposition it is just that -- talk), etc.

Of course, Suleiman (and by extension, Mubarak) is now aided and abetted by the western powers (US, Britain, France, Germany), who agree with Suleiman that the Mubarak regime must be gradually replaced so as not to cause chaos (like the chaos already created by the regime). That takes away the significant pressure for change brought on by the protestors, who have in some cases sacrificed life and limb to achieve their one goal, getting rid of Mubarak immediately. We have not created many friends in the protest movement by supporting the status quo.  Time will tell if anything new and different occurs between now and the September elections. Keep in mind that the people are not looking for an American style democracy. They are quite satisfied with the military government IF it can deliver on jobs, a better standard of living, better education and opportunity for those who are educated. There is another, more serious problem, that will ultimately determine Egypt's future.

Egypt update

Egypt is still at a boiling point and hopefully a tipping point. This has been simmering for years. On my first trip to Egypt in 1992, Mubarak was referred to as "The Laughing Cow," not exactly a term of endearment. He is not likely to survive this if the army sides with citizens. The army is the force in Egypt and very popular with the people, and is unlikely to shoot at its own citizens. All the scenes of protest on TV are taking place in very familiar places. I have often walked on the street along the Nile in Cairo and have visited Alexandria often. My friends out near Benha City are not experiencing any of these troubles and life goes on there as before. Glad to be right here watching it on TV.

Muslims taking over the world?

Anyone who lived through the 60s (and can remember doing so) recalls race riots, black power, burning cities and the general chaos that existed throughout our land. At the time, many white people worried they would be swept over in a rising tide of black nationalism. The disparity in birth rates between whites and blacks was interpreted by some to mean that blacks would soon be the majority and whites the minority.

Of course, that never happened. In fact, what did happen is that black people were finally integrated into American society as equals, no longer second class citizens. Today we even have a semi-black president. As is so often the case, we tend to demonize that which we don't know, including ethnic groups, races and religions. Amazingly, once we get to know people and find out they are just like us on the inside, it is difficult to see any demons.

What evolved with African-Americans, will also evolve with Muslim-Americans. It will also happen much faster than it ever will in Europe. Europe's Muslim-phobia is the result of so many people from Muslim countries (usually the countries once colonized by those same Europeans), coming to Europe for a better life. The latest expression of that phobia is the fear that the Muslim population is growing so fast, there will soon be more brown-skinned Muslims than white Christians.

Sounds like the 60s all over again. Part of the problem is that in Europe, like America in our recent past, immigrants are not well integrated into society. In Europe, they tend to collect in Muslim ghettos and typically can only find work in lower end jobs. There, they struggle with poverty and anger at their situation.

The Muslim population in Europe could well double over the next 10-20 years, but even then, they will still be a minority. The facts also seem to indicate that the birth rate among Muslims is slowing down, to the point it is not much higher than our average birth rate in the US, and the trend is for the birth rate to decrease further. In Western societies, as people became more educated, women were incorporated into the workforce and opportunities improved, the birth rate decreased. That will also happen in the Muslim world if given the chance (see my other new post).

Here in the States, Muslims have always integrated into our society well (check out the number of medical professionals in our community with Muslim names). It is only since 9-11 that Muslims have been demonized is some quarters. Those who go on TV and talk about burning Korans, terror babies, Shari'a law replacing our constitution and other nonsense, sound just like those guys in the white hoods who warned of the 'black takeover' 50 years ago. It's best to ignore the wingnuts and treat people the same as we want to be treated.

Unrest in Egypt

Sorry for being 'off the air' so long. Too many other commitments.

But since most of you reading this know my association with Egypt, I want to comment on the situation there and in other Arab countries, including Tunisia. I have visited Egypt almost every year since 1992 and have many friends there. It is a country with many strengths and weaknesses. Anyone who has visited the country knows one of its important strengths lies in the people of Egypt. If you look back over its 6,000 years of continuous history, Egypt has existed under the control of many different governments, from Greeks and Romans to French and English. These people are experts at living under all sorts of regimes and one reason they have been so adaptable is their family orientation.

They are used to presidents who consider the job a lifelong appointment. Since 1952 they have had only three presidents -- Nassar, Sadat and Mubarak. In each case -- if we compare it to the American system -- these men were good for the country during their first eight years in office. If those three had served their two terms and then stepped aside, Egypt could have been a first rate democracy. But the power of the ring (to borrow a Tolkein vehicle) was too compelling.

Too much of Egypt's budget goes to keeping Mubarak in power -- allowing his buddies to enrich themselves in exchange for loyalty, paying for ever-increasing security, and when the people get too restless, bribing them with raises (government is the largest employer other than farming) or subsidized bread. To keep everyone employed, the government simply created three faux jobs out of every real job and divided that one job's salary into three salaries. As they say in Egypt, 'the government pretends to pay us and we pretend to work.'

Now Mubarak is 82, in office for 30 years, and by most independent accounts, in failing health. He is grooming his son to take over as president. But the people have had enough. After all, they all get satellite TV and see how we live. With rising prices, little opportunity (half of college graduates cannot find work) and an oppressive government, the people do not want another Mubarakacrat in office.

This unrest all began last month in Tunisia. I was in Tunisia several years ago and, though small, it is the most prosperous North African country. The average income of $8,000 is highest in the Arab world. It is entirely Muslim, but very secular. It does all its international business with Europe to the point that the workweek in Tunisia is the same as Europe, Monday-Friday. So why the angry protests? President Ben Ali, both the country's savior and its scourge, would also have left a positive legacy if he stepped down after eight years, but instead was forced to flee the country after 23 years in power. Tunisians are more middle class on average than other Arab people, but they too are tired of a self-serving government using its resources primarily to remain in power.

Where will it all end? From my perspective, it will eventually end with new leadership, brought to power by the will of the people, who will then overstay their welcome by decades and history will repeat itself in another 30 years.

The World According to Milt: Let's travel back in time to ancient Egypt!

The World According to Milt: Let's travel back in time to ancient Egypt!

Let's travel back in time to ancient Egypt!

Anyone who knows me more than five minutes, knows I'm totally enamored with ancient Egypt. I go there just about every year and stay two or three weeks in this tiny farming village on the Nile Delta with my friend, Hamdy Nossair. Hamdy is an Egyptian native and archeologist who has lived in the U.S. for 25 years. He also has a tour business in Orlando and specializes in -- no surprise -- Egypt.

Well, guess what? We got together and organized a trip to ancient Egypt for a select group of travelers - people who would want to go to Egypt with Hamdy and me! This 11-day trip of a lifetime will see IN PERSON everything you have ever heard or seen about ancient Egypt -- Great Pyramids, Sphinx, King Tut's treasures and his tomb, the mummy of Ramses the Great, Valley of the Kings, Aswan Dam, Egyptian Museum, and much more. We will be staying in five-star hotels and enjoy a five day Nile cruise, where you can see farmers working in the fields as they did 5,000 years ago. The price is super reasonable and includes airfare from New York to Cairo, all hotels, tours, transportation, most meals, tour guides, the Nile cruise and a highlight of the trip -- a day in the tiny farming village where I go every year. Have tea with the farmers and their wives and enjoy a lunch prepared by Hamdy's family. This is NOT a tourist destination -- this is the REAL Egypt!

If you would like an itinerary and more information, email me at miltthomas@aol.com or call 772-567-2897. Y'all come!

Oh yes, there's that religious thing...

Let’s see – Jews believe in God and believe that God will send a Messiah. Their Holy Book is the Torah and the Old Testament reflects their beliefs and prophets.

Christians originally were Jews who believed Jesus was the Messiah promised by God, but then went on to form a separate religion with the same God and the same Old Testament prophets, but with the addition of a New Testament based on the life and teachings of Jesus.

Muslims are people who practice Islam and they believe in the same God as Jews and Christians (they call him Allah, which means "The God"). They share the same Old and New Testament prophets, but add Jesus as a prophet, not the son of God. They also add another prophet, Mohammed, who came 700 years after Jesus, and his teachings are written in the Koran, their Holy Book, which is geared more to people of the desert.

In spite of all this similarity, these three religions have fought each other since their beginnings. Not only that, Christians have fought (and continue to fight) each other for centuries – Catholics vs Protestants. Muslims have also fought each other for centuries (and continue to fight) – Sunnis vs Shi’ites.

Hindu, Buddhist and other religious affiliations have also fought with Jews, Christians and Muslims. It seems the only group that doesn’t go around killing everyone are the Atheists.

From the Nile River to the Alimentary Canal

Two of my favorite TV programs are Anthony Bourdain: No reservations and Bizarre Foods with Andrew Zimmern on the Travel Channel. Tony, Andrew and I have a lot in common – they’re from New York, I’m from New York; they’re writers, I’m a writer; they’re both chefs, I like to cook; they’re famous, I’m from New York.

Another similarity is that I enjoy eating strange foods in far away places. I’ve done chibuku (native beer) and Mopani worms in Zimbabwe, fried grasshoppers in Uganda, durian fruit in Thailand, so smelly it can’t be sold in a food store. I drink local water in Morocco and fresh vegetables in Egypt. Yet, I rarely suffer the usual tourist consequences. My brother, who traveled with me to Egypt and ended up sick, refers to me as the family goat.

So what’s my secret? Yogurt. Before going on a trip, I eat a cup of live culture yogurt every day for ten days. Some people rank yogurt right behind chibuku and Mopani worms, but I like it. No fruit or cheesecake flavoring. Just plain yogurt. Many travelers prefer the opposite approach, taking Cipro or some other antibiotic as a preventive. But my philosophy is, hey, the first humans ate road kill. Totally organic. No preservatives. Whatever didn’t kill them, immunized them against food-borne diseases. Today we try to sterilize our food. It’s unnatural. Try yogurt instead.

It appears that resolving long standing conflicts with Arabs and Muslims is a top priority for President Obama. Knowing it will take considerable time to reach any kind of resolution, the president decided to at least get the ball rolling. My sources in that part of the world tell me people are elated. It is important to understand WHY they are elated, though, because it all gets down to basic human nature. We have shown little respect toward these billion-plus people. How do you react to someone who makes it clear he/she has no respect for you? It doesn't matter what else happens in a relationship like that, the parties will never get anywhere without showing respect for each other.

I saw one news image at the start of the Iraq War in 2003 that told me we would never win the hearts and minds of those people. It was the photo of a fully armed US soldier standing over an Iraqi laying in the dirt. The soldier's left foot was firmly positioned on the Iraqi's back. Those who know me remember when I said we're going to lose this war. Recently, an Iraqi journalist threw his shoe at President Bush and it was repeated ad nauseum on television, probably because the Iraqi had great aim and might be a prospect for the Yankees.

But the message was clear to anyone in the Arab world - simply showing someone the sole of your shoe is a great insult; throwing the shoe is an insult with an exclamation point. Standing on someone means you consider that person lower than the dirt found on the bottom of a shoe. If the people who led us into that war had done the simplest research, they would have known shoes are meant for more than walking. Unfortunately, no one bothered to do much research about the Iraqi people. One reason is that we believed the people would welcome us with open arms. The real reason we did not know the rules of their culture though, was because we had no respect for them.