 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 4 - 10 May 2000 Issue No. 480 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 4 - 10 May 2000 Issue No. 480
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Special Features Travel Living Sports Profile People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters Thorny analogies
Sir- From Omayma Abdel-Latif's report (Al-Ahram Weekly, 6-12 April) on debates in Egypt over Zionism and Jewish history several insights can be gained. First, it is to be saluted that intellectuals in your country try to cope with these issues in a scholarly manner. Second the context of this debate should not be overlooked. As I see it from far-away Vienna, there are at least three intentions at work: a) to come to grips with a troubled history, b) to make a statement on "normalisation" and c) to prove one's critical distance from the "establishment." There are also implications of Islamism.It is not difficult to imagine that a combination of these intentions can be detrimental to scholarly efforts.
To begin with, analysis, definitions, explanations etc. should not start with the results of the Zionist project, but with its origins and reasons. And in order not to be apologetic about this project one has to distinguish between what really happened and the rationalisations, legitimations, myths etc. given to justify the enterprise. Such an approach would make it easier to study Zionism and Jewish history according to the different criteria of time and place and thus reach a much more realistic understanding of the topic.
I believe that the attitude opposing "normalisation" is an obstacle to such an approach, because it urges intellectuals to "construct" the enemy according to their own needs and is thus incapable of having an impact on real relationships with, or dynamic processes within the opposing camp.
I want to conclude with an example drawn from Al-Ahram Weekly (29 January - 4 February 1998). In his attempt to situate the genocide of European Jews in an Islamist perspective, Abdel-Wahab Elmessiri alludes to the fact that a certain category of prisoners in concentration camps was called "Muselmanen" (Muslims). He uses this fact to "demonstrate" that the Nazi henchmen hated Islam most and thus acted as Western crusaders. He "forgets" that the term "Muselmanen" was coined by the prisoners themselves in order to characterise their unfortunate fellow-sufferers who were already starved to skeletons and had given themselves up (the notion might have been drawn from perception that Muslims accept their destiny, Kismet)
I think that such a misunderstanding is not necessary and does not show real empathy for the victims.
The actual Crusader analogy in Hitler's war against the East and the Jews is brought out very well in a classic book by Arno J Mayer. A translation into Arabic should be highly recommended.
John Bunzl
Vienna, Austria
All readers' contributions and comments should be addressed to The Editor. Fax: +202 578 6089
E-mail: weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg
E-mail correspondents are asked to give postal address. Letters may be edited for length and clarity.
