Cambridge University Press For Jihad

Truth is good, business is better Cambridge University Press and its new strategic alliance

In classical education much stress has always been put on history, on comparing past human experiences, on disclosing the real motives and driving forces behind historical events. The other side of classical education included language ,especially in its political aspect that serves as a potent tool to distort reality and hide the real motives and acts. Without some knowledge of how our language works the unprepared observer can be easily misled to remain satisfied with mere words while forgetting to look for the undisclosed facts. This classical education was not a futile literary exercise. Thucydides, a great Greek historian and man of letters , brilliantly analysed this human perversity and didn’t hesitate to characterise his book as ‘valid for ever’. He meant that things and principles he observed in human behaviour during the Peloponnesian war would become manifest in any real conflict situation. Selfish interests, intrigues, dishonesty, blackmail would always bear the finest names our

dictionary is capable of while different legal and political mechanisms would make ways to discover the inconvenient facts behind insincere words extremely difficult, if not simply impossible. Yet, one might think that these awful things are valid just for politics and economics. One might hope that despite all of that there are some holy places, some temples and shrines left where the above doesn’t apply. In such places Truth is more than a different word for „arbitrariness” or „propaganda” and „fairness” would never ask a biased judge to ban freedom of speech to stop the disclosure or spread of inconvenient insights. Universities are often identified as such refuges of high moral and intellectual standards. Isn’t it there that Platonic ideas, not Machiavellian traps are worshipped and implemented ? But are they ? Are the mission statements , which sound so fine and soothing, borne out by real practices, particularly in critical situations? Are „the finest scholarly writing and pedagogy.”(...) „the pursuit of education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence”, „freedom of thought and expression” and „the encouragement of a questioning spirit” never “influenced either by political or commercial pressures, nor by any personal interests.”? I wish they weren’t. I wish these temples were serving the public interest and humanity’s ideals. One recent case sheds much light on how the declared passion for truth becomes more and more incompatible with some other undeclared ruling passions which govern universities behind the scenes. The case in question is that of Cambridge University Press whose credibility seems to be established once for all and whose virtue - just like that of Caesar’s wife should be above all suspicion, shouldn’t it ? Writing a book for Cambridge University Press is an tremendous and intricate task as scholarly standards are extremely high. „Cambridge University Press publishes the finest academic and educational writing”, as it is proudly stated by the said institution. First , a suitable book proposal must convince the Press editor, referees and Press Syndicate that the proposed book will be a real new contribution in the given field of study. Reasons for writing, what the book will cover, the expected readership and information about the author must be submitted. The proposal and supporting material are read by the appropriate editor who discusses it and makes an assessment with his competent colleagues. The governing body of Cambridge University Press , the Press Syndicate ( consisting of eighteen senior members of the University of Cambridge and advised by a staff of professional editors with thousands of academics and professionals around the world) must give their formal approval to the title published under its imprint. Only after all of these painstaking procedures, the

book can be submitted for further scrutiny and final printing. As we see, very little is left to chance and only the best Cambridge books come on the market. No doubt also “Alms for Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World”, printed in April 2006 in 1500 copies by Cambridge University Press, belongs to the category of “the finest academic writing” issued by this respectable institution. Besides, in a time where the world is being threatened by Islamic terrorists, this is a badly needed book. We read in its introduction : „This book seeks to unravel and bring clarity to the complex, elaborate, and secret world of Islamic charities that have financed terrorism.” Its two American authors J. Millard Burr and Robert O. Collins must be recommended as the most outstanding experts on the subject. The former worked for many years in the Department of State and was US logistics advisor for Operation Lifeline Sudan. He dealt with international charities for forty years. His friend is Emeritus Professor of History at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Both had written together three scholarly works before. So it seemed that also their fourth scholarly study would substantiate its publisher’s reputation for the self-proclaimed objective of „encouraging a questioning spirit” never “influenced either by political or commercial pressures, nor by any personal interests.” It perhaps would, had not a Saudi billionaire heard of the book too. Sheikh Khalid ibn Mahfouz, an Irish citizen, is one of the richest Saudis in the world. His father, the court financier of ibn Saud’s family, founded the National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia whose head in due course his son became. As such he has had the closest ties to all major companies operating in Saudi Arabia and many others outside the kingdom. But his record is clouded a bit as he was involved in many very suspect operations. The most notorious was ‘the Bank of Credit and Commerce International’ where he held a prominent post. The bank was convicted of supporting terrorism, bribery, arms trafficking and money laundering. Mahfouz’s brainchild , “The Muwafaq Foundation”, transferred money to al-Qaida, allegedly without any knowledge of its founder who squarely denied any charges and in fact has been never convicted. What is more, whenever he heard of too vocal skeptics of his professional integrity he sued them in the United Kingdom as his strategy consisted of appealing to the English libel law. This antiquated law, originating in 1819, favours the plaintiff against the defendant. It is up to the latter to prove his words cannot be construed as the plaintiff suggests. What it means in practice is that the defendant must be quite a wealthy person as British law is extremely expensive and slow. Before the defendant manages to produce the evidence at the court, he may be long ruined by costs involved so far. Mahfouz the billionaire was a notorious “libel tourist”. He chose inconvenient authors to ruin them through British courts unless they publicly recanted their allegations.

In March 2007, almost a year after the publication of „Alms for Jihad” ibn Makhfouz , he sued his next denigrator. This time it was to be a big symbolic kill - Cambridge University Press. To launch an attack on Cambridge ibn Mahfouz chose an alumnus of Cambridge College of Law , solicitor Laurence Harris ( !). Another curious thing was that for the work of two Americans he sued exclusively their publisher! The authors were of course ready to support their publisher. They offered all the necessary additional evidence at their disposal and had courage to face the rich plaintiff. But Cambridge University Press lacked any courage to fight its former alumnus and his client. Nor was it much interested in producing any evidence to support its case to the High Court in London where the case was handled by Mr Justice Eady. Cambridge University Press intellectual property director Kevin Tylor stated „Within the English jurisdiction and under English libel laws we simply did not have a defensible case.” Didn’t they? „And the evidence produced by the authors of Alms for Jihad, repeated from earlier sources, has not stood up to the requisite tests.” Strangely enough , the authors were not asked to testify at the court. What now followed in London resembled strongly the Moscow show trials from the mid 30-ies. Recanting heretical views, penitent confessions, humble apologies, accusations of second-class officials, weeping promises of never again committing the same and of sticking strictly to the PC party line In fact , Cambridge University Press- and one might think on the highest administrative level - ignominiously sacrificed its authors, acted disloyally towards all the numerous professional staff responsible for the preparation and the final quality of the book, ignored the decision made by its own respectable Press Syndicate to publish the book. Instead of suggesting re-considering the questionable passages in the book in order to improve the book Cambridge University Press simply destroyed it all lock, stock and barrel! And it went further! 200 libraries that had acquired the book, .were asked to get rid of it as quickly as possible. „Amazon” and other electronic bookshops suddenly declared the book was „currently unavailable”. To appease one man Cambridge University Press abandoned, many of their honest people and their loudly proclaimed principles. And then the infamous apology in the style of the above-mentioned Moscow Show Trials was published on the official wesite of Cambridge University Press where we read : "Throughout the book there are serious and defamatory allegations about yourself and your family, alleging support for terrorism through your businesses, family and charities, and directly.(...)

"As a result of what we now know, we accept and acknowledge that all of those allegations about you and your family, businesses and charities are entirely and manifestly false." Well , if I were ibn Mahfouz I would demand that a laudatory biography about me be published by the very Cambridge University Press. Would it not be the best way to show the entirely and manifestly true face of the denigrated virtue , would it ? Even those of us who have not enjoyed education at the University of Cambridge have heard that knowledge tends to progress. Who can be sure then that for today’s abject confessions Cambridge University Press will not have to write tomorrow a long apology and that for its books pulped today they will not be forced tomorrow to print thousands of its copies for free distribution across the world ? Of course, if they manage to pulp and obliterate all the traces of today’s scandal, they will be free from that inconveniency , free to further boast of „encouraging a questioning spirit never influenced either by political or commercial pressures, nor by any personal interests.”

I say that because I think that many commentators of this shameful story have missed one crucial aspect of it. In my opinion the key to it lies far away from the High Court in London and the official rationale given by Cambridge University Press. It is to be sought elsewhere - in Saudi Arabia itself. Cambridge University Press is heavily involved in Saudi Arabia where it depends first and foremost on the giant Obeikan Group ( printing, publishing, packaging , bookselling etc. across the Gulf Region and abroad). As they put it openly on their Website Cambridge University Press " is engaged in a strategic Joint Venture with the Obeikan Group of Saudi Arabia" and through it depends on a chain of bookstores across the kingdom : Jarir Bookstore, Tihama Publications , Elmia Bookstores and the biggest of them all - Obeikan Bookshop existing since 1991 and operating more than 100 000 titles. It means its new strategic allies can pressure Cambridge University Press at any time to enforce decisions the Saudis want to be made. In the case of "Alms for Jihad" Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz - who as former head of the National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia has close business , if not family, ties to

the Obeikan Group - must have told "the Press Syndicate, which bears responsibility for (...) the works produced" that unless they surrendered unconditionally and apologized they would face most serious troubles on the Saudi (and Saudi-controlled and influenced) market. He would ruin them. This might explain why Cambridge University Press ignored so blatantly the courageous offer of the authors of „Alms for Jihad" to provide all extra evidence to support their case at the High Court and why it made the arrangements with Mahfouz excommunicating its own book so swiftly. Having to choose between the loss of the Saudi market and "advancing learning, knowledge and research" Cambridge University Press didn't hesitate for a moment. Truth is good, business is better, at least in the eyes of the oldest printer and publisher in the world – Cambridge University Press.