Interview with Arab- American community leader Imad Hamad On Dearborn elections and the Arab American community- False claims hamper unity, depress turnout

Interview with Arab- American community leader Imad Hamad

On Dearborn elections and the Arab American community

False claims hamper unity, depress turnout

Elections are often times of high drama. The Michigan elections, particularly the Dearborn mayoral election, produced heat and noise that carried on after the elections were over and the results declared. To shed light on that phenomenon, I interviewed Mr. Imad Hamad, longtime community leader and activist and Executive Director of the American Human Rights Council. Below are edited excerpts from the interview:

Q: What is your assessment of the recent elections in the Detroit area?

I.H.: It was very good. A lot of excitement about new candidates. A lot of energy from the young volunteers in the different campaigns. It was gratifying to see more Arab and Muslim Americans running for office. As a community we are moving forward in important ways. We are breaking barriers. Despite all the difficulties, many in our community are rising up to the challenge. Today is better than yesterday. Seeing the candidates and the campaign volunteers, I have no doubt that the future is promising. In a democracy, in an important sense, we are all winners.

Q: Was there drama in the election, with differences leading to conflict and division?

I.H. I think differences are natural. Division is a negative word, difference with conflict and negativity leads to division. It is normal to have different opinions. I think our challenge in the Arab American and Muslim American community is to accept differences and respect difference of opinions. There is no uniformity across communities or even within communities. Arab Americans and Muslim Americans are not exceptional communities, we have exceptional challenges but as to our internal dynamics, we are just like all other ethnic communities. We are not an exception to the norm. The US is not a monolith and the communities in the US are not a monolith. The name of a group or organization is not dispositive. Therefore, no single group can claim to represent a whole community regardless of what it calls itself. Humility is needed. Our differences enrich us, some of our veteran activists don’t get that. Sadly, due to hunger for accumulating unchecked power and inflated egos, many refuse to acknowledge this basic fact and try to suppress others using dirty tactics. Our community at large should not to be distracted and we focus on unity of goals- the goals are empowerment through voice and participation.

Q: What do you think of the Arab vote and the turnout?

The turnout was low, as usual. Unfortunately, we continue to struggle with turnout despite all the good efforts invested by all across the board. It is a national challenge and not just limited to the Arab and Muslim American community per se.  We still have a long way ahead of us despite the impressive progress we are witnessing and despite all the odds. Increasing turnout should be the top priority for all and it requires our collective efforts. This should be put above all political and personal differences. I always tell people their vote matters especially their smart vote. I advocate a smart vote. A smart vote is that which is informed of the issues and rises above gender, race and partisanship. A smart vote focuses on the qualities of the candidate- their qualities, their credentials, their stands and their positions.

Q: What are some of the challenges to community empowerment?

I.H. There are voices in the community that perceive diversity as a threat. Many oddly even see diversity of representation as a weakness. Promoting a narrow political agenda is anathema to representing the whole community. Some want a monopoly acting as if the community is a monolith and that they speak for it. Seniority has its perks but it is not a blank check. Reality check: there is not one person in any community who can claim to speak for the whole community. There is not one organization that can claim to speak in the name of a whole community. Regardless of the names and labels. Diversity and freedom of choice are healthy. Monopoly and bullying can only be sustained through unsavory means such as false claims and character assassination. We see it all around the world. We should make sure to push back against these tendencies in our Arab and Muslim American communities.

Q: As to Dearborn, whom did the Arab American community support?

All community organizations did their best to increase turnout. There are two major political action committees, the American Muslim American Political Action Committee (AMPAC) and the Arab American political Action Committee (AAPAC) and their list was 90% the same. The only difference was that AAPAC supported the incumbent O’Reilly while AMPAC endorsed Tom Tafelski. These two PACS were the center of the attention during this race. The election for mayor in Dearborn was heated for that reason- the two PACS went head to head as to the mayoral election. AAPAC is older. They supported O’Reilly and that is fine. AMPAC is the newer PAC, they supported Tafelski. MPAC was the only PAC behind Tafelski.  The attention was on AMPAC because all other PACS within the community backed O’Reilly except AMPAC.

Q: Why did AMPAC endorse Tafelski?

I.H: It’s a democratic process. The members vote whom to support. That does not mean it was unanimous. Just like any other PACS, members get to choose after discussion and elaborations. It’s called democracy, where majority decide, exactly like any other network. It was seen “odd” simply because it was the exception within the community to endorse Mr. Tafelski.

Q: Why was AMPAC’s endorsement of Tafelski seen as a problem?

I.H.: Again, AAPAC endorsed O’Reilly, AMPAC endorsed Tafelski. It’s a democratic process and the members of each PAC voted and chose. You would think this is not a big deal, that’s what democracy is. However, it was as if civil war erupted. Some had this attitude of who is this group to leave the reservation and its members to choose the “wrong” candidate! It’s like saying: “How dare they think and decide for themselves, they should let others think and decide for themselves.” It’s outrageous.

Q: Did O’Reilly face a real challenge, incumbents have a huge advantage?

I.H.: In the primary the incumbent was facing a real threat. It seemed possible that the incumbent would lose. That made the race much more heated. It was the first mayoral race in recent memory that was a true race.  Heated and tense. These kinds of contests are good for democracy- coronations are bad.

Q: One Arab American PAC supports O’Reilly, the other Tafelski, was that seen as a problem?

I.H.: Yes, by a few. This few tried to play the support of Tafelski as a sectarian matter. This is, on the face of it, silly, untrue, counterproductive and unhealthy. The overwhelming majority of the voters did not see it that way. It looks like entrenched individuals saw the new voice, AMPAC, as a threat and dealt with it by playing the sectarian card- accusing the other side of sectarianism. It is simply a defense of turf and an attempt to marginalize the other. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. The real issue here is that the Arab American community is not punching its weight- we continue to underperform. Our electoral strength is way less than our demographic strength. Why? And these accusation and diversions don’t help at all. This rhetoric is very damaging. I hope and wish that all stakeholders rise above personality and turf and engage in a constructive discussion based on mutual respect.

Q: Does the community need more PACs, more organizations?

I.H.: Yes. It’s not up to me or up to you or anyone else to tell others what they can do. The challenges are big and we need the efforts of all. The easiest way to silence others is to tar and feather them by some false charges manufactured for political expediency. We see that in Dearborn very often and it is simply a vulgar power grab. People should be able to organize and think for themselves. Dearborn is not North Korea. That is the beauty of democracy. We should not have an Arab Kim.

Q: What do you see as the real challenges facing the Arab American community?

I.H.: The best approach is to recognize all the stakeholders and have an inclusive process. Turning against each other under false flags and false claims is self-defeating, we are shooting ourselves in the foot. We have serious challenges. As a community we are at the mercy of international developments beyond our control. Demonizing Arabs and Muslims is still a successful strategy in US politics. We need to increase turnout. All these are real threats. Empowerment should be the focus.  As with every election, I hope that the community and its leadership can draw the rights lessons, learn from the experience and focus on advancing the common good despite the different political views. The 20018 elections is very important and we must be ready to count. We simply cannot afford divisions under manufactured self- serving claims from the usual suspects. Our community’s interest as one diverse community should be always first and above any one leader or one organization regardless of how long they have been around. I hope and trust that our community at large is mature enough to move on and be ready for future challenges.