Taking Arabs Seriously....

[Violet_Crumble]

Marc Lynch
From Foreign Affairs, September/October 2003


RIGHT GOAL, WRONG APPROACH


For the hawks in the Bush administration, one of the keys to understanding the Middle East is Osama bin Laden's observation that people flock to the "strong horse." Bush officials think U.S. problems in the region stem in part from "weak" responses offered by previous administrations to terrorist attacks in the 1980s and 1990s, and they came into office determined to reestablish respect for U.S. power abroad. After nearly two years of aggressive military actions, however, the United States' regional standing has never been lower. As the recent Pew Global Attitudes survey put it, "the bottom has fallen out of Arab and Muslim support for the United States."

The failure to find dramatic evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction has spurred widespread debate in the Middle East about the real purpose of the recent war, which most Arab commentators now see as a bid by the United States to consolidate its regional and global hegemony. U.S. threats against Iran and Syria play into this fear, increasing a general determination to resist. And the chaos that followed the fall of Baghdad, the escalating Iraqi anger at what is always described as an American occupation, and the seemingly ambivalent U.S. attitude toward Iraqi democracy have reinforced deep preexisting skepticism about Washington's intentions.

Because of the speed with which intense anti-Americanism has recently emerged across all social groups in the region -- including educated, Westernized Arab liberals -- the problem cannot be attributed to enduring cultural differences, nor to long-standing U.S. policies such as support for Israel or local authoritarian leaders. Arabs themselves clearly and nearly unanimously blame specific Bush administration moves, such as the invasion of Iraq and what they see as a desultory and one-sided approach to Israeli-Palestinian relations. But perhaps even more important than the substance of the administration's policies is the crude, tone-deaf style in which those policies have been pursued. The first step toward improving the United States' image, therefore, must be figuring out how to address Arabs and Muslims effectively.

Ironically, for this administration above all others, taking Arab public opinion seriously cannot be considered either a luxury or a concession to "Arabists" lurking in the bureaucracy. It is instead crucial to the success of the administration's own strategy, which links U.S. security to a democratic and liberal transformation of the region. The Bush team's practice, however, has worked against its stated goals, largely because it has been based on misguided assumptions about the Arab world.

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20030901faessay82506/marc-lynch/taking-arabs-seriously.html

[papau]

1. First thing the "experts" should note is the existance of Berbers

Here we have a Muslim population with a 100 year tradition of democracy - and during that time Arab kings and Islamist have ruled them - leading to rebellion in Morocco and Tunisia.

Yet we look for folks that are Arab and that want democracy?

Crazy. The Berbers call themselves Imazighen (Free Men – from the Greek) - and are the Jewish folks who were present in North Africa from Greek/biblical times as artisans and traders. The Berbers converted to Judaism and resisted the Arab incursion until they were conquered and forced to convert to Islam. Indeed some friends of mine fathers and grandfathers were forced to convert from Judiasm in order to stay alive in Algeria - and this was in the 1940's!

The main Bush misguided assumptions about the Arab world is the idea that a "stable" dictator who is pro-west so as to guarantee the flow of oil - that this fellow is the best of all possible worlds for US interests.

I get tired for our search for Muslims who back democracy when they are all around us. Our focus should be the Islamist nuts from Saudi Arabia and elsewhere, getting those of us that have lived there and have many Muslim relationships to explain to the romantic EU types that a terrorist, even if Muslim and "just" killing Jewish kids, is still a terrorist.

I see Taba is all over the foreign affairs folks writing in the past week as the place we must get back too - (with right of return only to West Bank - although Barak was willing to throw in a symbolic few thousand over 10 years back to Israel) - and the idea being floated to scrap the road map and move directly to putting Taba on the Ballot, in both Israel and the PA areas - with the Israeli area limited to the 6% increase via border adjustments (Ar'il and its 30000 Jews are on the wrong side of the line!).

I kind of like this - and if worded as conditional "would you favor Taba if the other side also agrees to Taba" I think it would pass.

Sharon would shit his pants over the settlements, and Arafat would go nuts about right of return - but I suspect 95% of both areas would vote in favor.

[rini]

3. Thank you for your excellent posting.

I have said time and again it's not the religion of Islam that's the problem, it's the Islamists.

[WheresWaldo]

2. good post

thanks