SATURDAY, AUGUST 21, 2010 COLBERT I. KING


Still some explaining to do in mayor’s race W


ith about four weeks to go before D.C. primary day, candidates are continuing to participate in com-


munity forums and debates across the city. Fewer undecided voters are attending these gatherings, however, and the candi- dates appear to know it. Now it’s a matter of their playing to supporters and not of- fending the rest of the crowd. This is a less than satisfying situation.


Major issues, particularly those between mayoral candidates Adrian Fenty and Vin- cent Gray, remain not only unresolved but also woefully unaddressed. Two that cry out for a full-throated debate but instead are getting glossed over in a sea of one-liners: public schools and public corruption. Campaigns instead seem to be shifting


attention to their ground game, namely GOTV (or get out the vote), emphasizing literature drops, door knocking and phone calling in targeted areas to identify sup- porters to turn out on Sept. 14. The me- chanics of GOTV are getting finely tuned and ready to go. Would that the same energy were devot- ed to the issues.


There are no outsiders among us


by Stephanie J. Jones L


ost in the furor over the proposed Is- lamic cultural center near Ground Zero is a simple fact: The opposition to the center is the strongest argument in favor of it going right where it is planned. By most accounts, much of the opposition is based on an inaccurate conflation of Islam with terrorism, stemming from ignorance about the Muslim religion, culture and peo- ple. While troubling, this is hardly surpris- ing in a nation in which a significant minor- ity of Americans believe that our Christian president is Muslim (and so what if he were?).


Exiling the center to another part of


Manhattan will expand and deepen the gulf between the Islamic community and its neighbors. The best way to bridge this gap is to help people understand that their trep- idation is based not in reality but born of a myth that has been cruelly exploited. The Islamic cultural center can help span this chasm.


Of course, it’s not fair to expect a minor-


ity community to educate the majority, es- pecially when the majority is so hostile to it. Sadly, minorities have long shouldered the burden of proving to the majority that they pose no threat, that they are not inferior and that they, too, deserve everything the majority takes for granted as its due — while patiently enduring misunderstand- ing and even abuse. They do all this in the face of demands that they are going too fast, pushing too hard and making life too un- comfortable for others. That was the case in 1963 when white ministers in Birmingham, Ala., accused Martin Luther King Jr. of exacerbating ra- cial tensions by leading protests against the city’s segregation laws. They called his ac- tions “unwise and untimely.” Dr. King re- sponded with his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” in which he wrote: “Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct-action campaign that was ‘well timed’ in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word ‘Wait!’ It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This ‘Wait’ has almost always meant ‘Never.’ ” Nearly 50 years later, it is Muslims who are being told to wait, to go away and re- main out of sight until their presence can be tolerated by others. While much has changed in the past five decades, the drum- beat against the Islamic center echoes the calls of the well-meaning but misguided Birmingham ministers. Following in the footsteps of those who called for King and his “outsiders” to retreat, opponents of the cultural center urge that it be banished to another neighborhood because its presence near Ground Zero is unsettling and poten- tially dangerous. But forcing the Islamic center out of sight will only allow ignorance and fear to fester and grow. It will keep more Americans from learning a lesson that King shared with the ministers: “Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds.” If the center is established in Lower Man-


hattan, the people most opposed to it now will eventually have a chance to learn that Muslims aren’t the enemy. That they aren’t dangerous or terrorists or even, in fact, out- siders. They are the lady who smiles at them in the grocery store; the teenager who roots for the Yankees; the little girl who plays with their daughter. Muslims are their neighbors. They are Americans. They are their friends. The Islamic center needs to be right where it is planned because that’s where human change will come about — one par- ent, one child, one friend at a time. Instead of demanding that the Muslims get out, the residents of Lower Manhattan should be grateful that their fellow Americans are willing to stay put and make the effort, un- der difficult circumstances, to build bridges so that, as King said, “the deep fog of misun- derstanding can be lifted from our fear- drenched communities.”


The writer, a public affairs and government relations strategist, was executive director of the National Urban League Policy Institute from 2005 to 2010.


BY JONES FOR THE FREE LANCE-STAR


Fenty took over the school system in 2007 with the pledge of turning D.C. schools into America’s highest performing urban school system. Has it happened? If not, how close has he come to fulfilling his commitment? This week Post education writer Bill Tur- que took major steps toward answering those questions with his story on the prog- ress of Fenty’s school reform efforts. His re- porting on test scores was especially im- portant, since the Fenty administration has made scores a litmus test of success. Turque reported that while the upward trend in test scores, started by former su- perintendent Clifford Janey, has contin- ued under Fenty’s handpicked chancellor Michelle Rhee, elementary pass rates in reading and math declined about 4.5 points this year. Worse still, the achievement gap be-


tween the District’s poorest children and its most affluent has, in some cases, wid- ened. So, too, the black-white gulf. The achievement gaps go to the heart of school reform efforts. Rhee believes — al- most as an article of faith — that the teach-


er is key to student achievement, and she has turned the school system upside down trying to make that point. There is, of course, a contrary view that the teacher, while crucial, cannot get the job done without the support of a solid principal and a home that sends a child to school ready to learn. Families must also see to it that what is taught in the class- room is nurtured and reinforced at home. Rhee acknowledged in an interview


with Turque that closing the achievement gap is “maddening and it’s hard,” adding: “The gap is still ridiculous.” “Ridiculous,” but understandable to those who believe that conditions beyond the school building, especially economic and social disparities, can affect learning. That’s not an excuse, but a call for a stron- ger and sharper focus on addressing the inequalities that breed failure. Fenty’s reelection bid should not turn solely on his selection and support of Mi- chelle Rhee. He should engage Gray directly in a de-


bate on school progress, the merits of high- stakes testing, the distribution of spending


KLMNO


K R


A13


on aging schools, data on graduation rates, etc. With the school system now in the mayor’s hands, voters need to know which candidate has a better grip. Likewise, voters shouldn’t enter the polls not knowing whether the Fenty ad- ministration has engaged in cronyism and rigged city contracts, as Gray has alleged, or whether, in turn, Gray is a hurler of false claims who will say anything to gain pow- er.


Nothing is more corrosive to good gov- ernment than officials who abuse the pub- lic trust. Adebate in which Gray is required to de- tail his corruption charges and support them with evidence — and in which Fenty is called upon to explain the nature and ex- tent of his relationships with friends who have received city contracts, including his knowledge of when and how the deals were arranged — would be enlightening. In fact, it’s a must. So let the gearing-up for election day continue. Don’t let the candidates skate by. We still have time.


kingc@washpost.com


Hold off on Burma


by David I. Steinberg


of inquiry into the Burmese military regime’s crimes against humanity and war crimes. That human rights violations have occurred is clear, and many have noted that the Burmese junta’s restrictions on its upcoming elections make it all but certain the generals will retain power. The real dilemma is whether it is better to ex- press moral outrage at these offenses or to hold off, presuming the possi- bility of eventual change under a new government. The options for nation states to


T Drawing Board


express moral outrage are well es- tablished: sanctions, war crimes tri- als, embargoes. These are also tac- tics designed to achieve certain ends: liberalization, increased hu- man rights, regime change or other indicators of progress. The key ques- tion for U.S. officials ahead of Bur- ma’s Nov. 7 elections is: Will actions such as imposing new sanctions or endorsing a commission of inquiry improve the lot of the Burmese? Will they help further U.S. strategic and humanitarian objectives in that soci- ety and region under a revised gov- ernment? The Burmese constitution all but


guarantees that its military will re- main in command after the elec- tions; by law, 25 percent of seats are reserved for the military. The voting for national and local legislatures will occur before opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi is to be released from house arrest, and many in her now-defunct National League for Democracy have pledged not to cam- paign in the biased elections. Fur- ther, the generals have legal immu- nity from in-country prosecution for all acts committed in official capac- ities.


BY LUCKOVICH FOR THE ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION


Despite all this, it is likely that some members of the opposition — in modest numbers — will be among those seated in the central and local legislatures next year — marking the first time opposition voices would be legal in Burma since 1962. It seems likely that political pris- oners will be freed around the time of the elections so that they cannot “interfere” with that controlled proc- ess. There have also been indications that badly needed economic reforms could be instituted by the next Bur- mese administration and that civil- ians could play significant roles in the government. Essentially, it is possible that in Burma in the near future, we may see the transforma- tion of a “soft authoritarian” state into one that is more pluralistic, in- cluding with some legal opposition legislators. In Burmese military lin- go, it may be a “discipline-flourish- ing democracy” — but not a democ- racy unencumbered by deleterious adjectival modifications. The plight of the Burmese people has long distressed many. But im- posing additional sanctions on Bur- ma’s regime or forming still more commissions will only salve our con- sciences. Neither will help the Bur- mese people, persuade the govern- ment to loosen its grip on the popu- lation, or even assist the United States in meeting its strategic or hu- manitarian objectives. In fact, such moves would hinder negotiations and relations with a new govern- ment that, even if far from a model for governance, would probably give the Burmese more political voice and freedom than they have had in half a century. If our concerns are for the well-being of the people and U.S. national interests in the region, then we might well wait for the elections and whatever government comes into power. Then will be the time to judge whether there has been a step forward and how to achieve our goals.


BY ERIC ALLIE


David I. Steinberg, a professor of Asian studies at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, is the author of “Burma/Myanmar: What Everyone Needs to Know.”


POST PARTISAN Excerpts from The Post’s opinion blog, updated daily at washingtonpost.com/postpartisan


DAVID IGNATIUS Two invitations to


the same party The Israeli-Palestinian direct peace talks that are set to open next month in Washington have been framed, of neces- sity, with ambiguity about what guide- lines, if any, will shape the negotiating process. The Palestinian side agreed Friday to come to the talks based on a statement of principles that was issued by the Quartet, a group that includes the Unit- ed States, Russia and the European Union. That document calls on the par- ties “to resolve all final status issues,”


such as Jerusalem and refugees. It also affirms the goal of “a just, lasting and comprehensive regional peace as envis- aged in the Madrid terms of reference, Security Council resolutions and the Arab Peace Initiative.” Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Ne-


tanyahu, however, has not affirmed these Quartet principles in agreeing to join the Washington talks. He is re- sponding to the invitation issued by Sec- retary of State Hillary Clinton, without endorsing any terms of reference. In- deed, Netanyahu is said to have explic- itly rejected the language of the Quartet statement as a framing document. It’s a classic piece of diplomacy: One side is responding to one letter of in- vitation; the other is responding to a subtly different request. It’s a finesse that has succeeded in getting both to the


table, but it also highlights the huge dif- ferences that exist between the two sides — and could scuttle the talks. The Obama administration is also fi- nessing the question of whether the moratorium on Israeli settlement-build- ing, which is set to expire in late Sep- tember, will be extended. American offi- cials are evidently hoping that once talks are rolling, the Israeli prime min- ister won’t want to blow them up by re- suming settlement activity — and won’t want the political onus of being seen as having undermined the U.S.-led peace effort. The Arab side has feared that Netan- yahu would drag out negotiations with- out delivering major concessions. In a nod to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Friday’s announce- ment said there would be a one-year


limit on the talks. After opening meetings in Washing- ton on Sept. 1-2, U.S. officials plan to move the talks to a venue where the par- ties can bargain without intrusion. The opening of the talks will be a milestone for President Obama, who came to office with high hopes that he could achieve a breakthrough but who quickly discovered the pitfalls of peace- making. From the first, the administra- tion has been divided over the question of whether the talks should be framed by an opening statement of principles (as the Arabs wanted) or be open-ended (as the Israelis insisted). In the end, they appear to have had it both ways. But if it was this hard to get people to agree to come to the table, that surely doesn’t bode well for the larger issues that need to be resolved.


he United States decided this week to support the creation of a United Nations commission


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76