Speaking freedom

But stand how, and when and where8212;queried The New York Times, for one. Did Bush mean to endorse plebiscites in Saudi Arabia or Egypt that could yield anti-American governments? What does the invocation of rights 8216;8216;secured by free dissent and the participation of the governed8217;8217; mean vis-a-vis Russia, China or Pakistan? What about the trade-offs Bush has regularly made in the name of securing American interests?

But this was a 8216;8216;historic8217;8217; speech made more powerful, not less, by its generality8212;William Kristol told The Washington Post. Kristol is a leading neo-conservative commentator and editor of the influential Weekly Standard. In the magazine, they hailed Bush8217;s address for its 8216;8216;breakthrough8217;8217;. Executive editor Fred Barnes wrote that Bush 8216;8216;smashes the wall between the idealists and the realists8217;8217; by saying that the creation of more democracies will make the US more secure.

Outside the US, especially in Britain and the Middle East, media comment spotlighted the religious tone of Bush8217;s speech. His invocations of 8216;8216;freedom8217;8217; were decoded as a threat and a warning, at a time of rising speculation over his plans for Iran.

London!

What do 300 languages and every race, colour, nation and religion on earth in a single city all add up to? In The Guardian, a tribute to London assessed the famed cosmopolitanism of possibly the 8216;8216;most diverse city ever8217;8217;. What many see as the great experiment of multi-culturalism will triumph in London 2005, or fail here, wrote Leo Benedictus after visiting the immigrant communities that give the city its 8216;8216;vibrancy8217;8217; and 8216;8216;more importantly, its food8217;8217;.

Benedictus8217;s findings are provocative. What makes most people who come to London for money stay on, he said, is not the tolerance of its people. It is their indifference. Londoners mind their own business and they let you mind yours. Londoners don8217;t tolerate their city8217;s diversity, they ignore it. While this is progress for a people who actively persecuted immigrants through the 20th century, Benedictus wondered whether it is multiculturalism. 8216;8216;The days when a man in a turban could stop traffic are behind us, but the days when the average Londoner knows why he wears it are yet to come8217;8217;.

Multi-culturalism was also the subject in a seminar hosted by The Guardian where participants took the question head on: how should the progressive left of centre, always wary of religion, deal with the reassertion of religion in British political life? Multi-culturalism, with all its foibles, was the Left8217;s response to mass immigration in the 8217;60s. Now that British Asians are increasingly choosing to define themselves in terms of their religion, not ethnicity, what could the answer be?

Hope, yet

There is the unrelenting violence in Iraq. And the images of daily despair from Israel-Palestine. Amid the gloom, Lebanon8217;s The Daily Star took note of two heartening moments in the region.

Iran8217;s hardline judiciary withdrew the summons to Nobel prize winner Shirin Ebadi and the paper commended the 8216;8216;bold and rare8217;8217; step. 8216;8216;Such a public admission of error, almost unheard of in the Islamic Republic, suggests the government is making an effort8212;at least in this case8212;to apply the rule of law8217;8217;

And in an article, executive editor Rami G Khourie welcomed an 8216;8216;unprecedented8217;8217; one-day workshop at the University of Jordan on 8216;8216;security sector reform and challenges to institution building8217;8217;. Khourie saw hope: it is slowly becoming acceptable, he said, to discuss the role of security and defence agencies in Arab public life.