I have received your letter and the accompanying photograph, which you identified as that of a section of the frieze in the Supreme Courtroom, located in the capital, Washington, D.C. The frieze (tunf) portrays images of eighteen of the greatest leaders in human history who played a role in either establishing or enforcing laws or Shara'i. One of these images purports to represent the Prophet Muhammad (SAAS). The artist placed the Qur'an in one hand of this image, thus symbolically recognizing it as the source of Islamic legislation. In his other hand, the figure holds a sword symbolizing the power of the state. This second symbol is in recognition of the fact that the Prophet was also a leader of his community.

It gives me great pleasure to be here today and to give remarks on a subject in which I take considerable interest, the legal and social status of women. I would like to thank Ambassador Mejdoub, the Hannibal Club, and the President's Interagency Council on Women for providing this forum to discuss and promote women's issues.

Women from all countries have much to share with each other about their own cultures, experiences, successes, and failures. Today, as always, women are the primary caregivers worldwide. We bear and nurture the children, and we manage the household for our families. But we also work outside the home. We want and expect to have equal opportunities in business, in the professions, and in public service. We want and expect to be paid as much as men for the same work. While women have made tremendous advances in this century, the process of achieving gender equality is still an ongoing one, in this country and throughout the world. In many respects, we have traveled far, although we have a way yet to go. We remember the old adage that “[t]he test of every civilization is the position of women in the society.”

In this age of information technology that shrank our world into a global village, it is fair to ask how this recent development has impacted Muslim women's rights across the world. Having just traveled through nine Muslim countries, ranging from Pakistan and Bangladesh to the Gulf States, Egypt, Syria, and Lebanon, I would answer that it is leading, slowly but surely, to reassessment and change. Attempts to accelerate the pace of this change, however, without full understanding of its complex topology, and the deep-rooted commitment by most Muslim women to spiritual and cultural authenticity, could halt or even reverse this process at great cost to women particularly and Muslim societies as a whole. Hence the challenges and opportunities.

During the latter part of the twentieth century, Islamic law or shari'a has had an increasingly practical influence on the types of cases adjudicated in American courts. As the Muslim population continues to grow, the American legal system will inevitably face interesting, complex family law questions that are intertwined with Islamic law. While religious denominations have a genuine and continuing interest in marriage and its rights and obligations, religious laws are clearly subordinate to state secular law. A religious marriage is valid only to the extent that it complies with a state's statutory requirements. Likewise, state statutes regulate divorce and designate specific state courts as the forum for the divorce proceeding. Since marriage and divorce are controlled by secular state law, it is insufficient for Muslims to adhere solely to the shari'a on these matters. However, as the state continues to cede some of its traditional authority in favor of increased private ordering of the institution of marriage, religious adherents are looking to contracts as a means to abide by religious precepts and secular law. These contracts provide methods whereby “parties agree to internal (religious law) resolutions of marital disputes, but the agreement itself is enforceable by the external authorities.”

We live in a world in which four fifths of its population live in frustration while the other fifth lives in fear. The United Nations, our world's “figleaf,” does not hide the shame of humanity but rather scandalizes humanity's malaise. It is troubling that the League of Nations and the United Nations were born after two world wars. Humanity's unity should come as a natural birth and not as the result of a caesarian section, i.e., through violent global wars. This is reminiscent of the ages of epidemics. Then, because of ignorance about the causes behind these illnesses, plagues swept through communities, leaving millions of dead behind. Yet, after technology made it possible for us to see smaller forms of life and medicine brought us a better understanding of germs, communities became better equipped to halt disease and heal the sufferers. If a country now is devastated by an epidemic, we blame it on the lack of sufficient hygiene. So too, the wars that erupt here and there are caused by ignorance of the intellectual organisms that infect communities with hate and influence people to commit atrocities. In today's world, relying on science, we concern ourselves with preventing germ warfare while sheltering the intellectual viruses that destroy us: our intellectual foods are still polluted. We cannot afford to continue to be confused or ignorant about these invasive germs.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss potential principles for interpersonal dispute resolution models within an Islamic context. Such a task requires an Islamic researcher to walk a fine line in order to avoid falling in one of two methodological traps. The first trap is to draw upon western literature on conflict analysis and resolution without sufficient consideration of whether and how that literature may be applied in an Islamic setting. The subtle assumptions underlying most of the conflict intervention models developed in the west have gone undetected, until recently. The other trap is to embark upon a review of the existing Islamic literature relevant to conflict. This approach leads directly to entrapment in circles of legalistic interpretations developed centuries ago, which lack the spirit of conflict resolution as a movement for social change and an interdisciplinary field of research.

The gulf in perception between Islamic and secular perspectives over the meaning of human rights is growing. Media reports and western governments repeatedly charge Muslim governments from Sudan to Iran of human rights violations. In some parts of the Muslim world, a string of events indeed suggest that the violation of human rights continue with little sign of immediate abatement. Tragedy is the overriding topos of the media attention that such events receive. The list can become endless, but I will only mention a few incidents in order to highlight the salient contexts and issues for the purposes of a discussion on human rights. The Turkish Muslim feminist Konca Kuris was kidnapped by a Turkish group known as the Hizbullah in 1998 and her dead body was found in 1999. In 1997 Egypt's highest court ruled that the writings of a Cairo University professor, Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd were tantamount to apostasy. In 1992, Muslim militants assassinated the Egyptian human rights activist and essayist Farag Fouda. The 1980s witnessed the international imbroglio amounting to a debacle when Iran's clergy offered a ransom to anyone who would assassinate the Indian-born British author Salman Rushdie for writing novels that offended Muslim sensibilities. On a daily basis, spine chilling reports of death and civilian casualties perpetrated by Muslim militants and the military in Algeria bewilder observers after the army's subversion of the democratic process in that country. In many Muslim countries like Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Tunisia, intellectuals are subjected to harassment by traditionalist and fundamentalist quarters alike as well as by governments for their critical study of religion and for opinions that do not meet with approval from the religious establishment. When human rights concerns are raised, officials from Muslim countries accuse the West of using a double standard in its application of human rights, of mounting the human right claim as an instrument of political power against nations who do not further its political and economic agendas.

Today, there is little debate that a paradigm shift is occurring in the field of international conflict resolution; where experts laud the effectiveness of peaceful means ending disputes compared with the use of force or violence. This paradigm shift is reflected in the increasing number of peacebuilding academic and applied programs in Eastern Europe, Latin America, Africa, South and East Asia, and the Middle East, including conflict resolution workshops, projects for building civil societies, and nonviolent resistance mobilization. In peacebuilding contexts, scholars and practitioners are seeking to integrate authentic, indigenous and local cultural methods of conflict analysis and intervention, which are replacing the generic conflict resolution applications developed by western practitioners in United States and Europe.

In March 1998, Hany Kiareldeen, a 30-year old Palestinian immigrant living in New Jersey, was arrested by United States immigration authorities and imprisoned. Government officials told him that his presence in the United States threatened national security. When Kiareldeen asked why, he was told that the evidence that supported the charge was secret, and could not be revealed to him because its disclosure would imperil national security. Kiareldeen spent 19 months in prison without seeing the evidence that placed him there, until a federal judge ruled in October 1999 that his detention was unconstitutional and ordered his release. The government's principal source appears to have been Kiareldeen's ex-wife, with whom he was in a custody dispute over their child. He offered unrebutted testimony that she had made numerous false allegations against him in the course of the dispute, all of which had been dismissed by local officials. But one allegation, that he was associated with terrorists, was passed on to the FBI, and that allegation landed him in jail on secret evidence for over 19 months.