2 - 8 May 2002
Issue No.584
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 2 - 8 May 2002 Issue No.584 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Street wise
There is "the street" and then there are those who play it, writes Bahgat Korany *
The proverbial "Arab street" was jubilant when President Mubarak turned down a meeting with US Secretary of State Colin Powell. Powell was, instead, relegated to a meeting with Egypt's Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher. Is the popularity of Mubarak's gesture symptomatic of how the Egyptian and Arab "street" thinks of the state of Arab-American relations? If Arab-American tension has reached the street level, the crisis this time round may be both different and deeper-seated.
Is focusing on "street politics" helpful in understanding what is taking place between the US and the Arab states?
At a big gathering of MESA (Middle East Studies Association) members last November, the term "street politics" was contested. MESA is an organisation that groups together some of the most renowned Middle East specialists from all over the world. They meet once a year, usually in November, to review, interpret, analyse and re-analyse Middle Eastern politics and society. Given the social and political richness of the region, these specialists are never at a loss to find some phenomena or event to analyse and comment on.
The annual meeting last November was the 35th gathering so far, and it took place in San Francisco just a few weeks after the 11 September attacks in the US.
Although the tense post-11 September atmosphere meant that some Arab and Muslim analysts did not bother with the trip because of all the newly-imposed security and airport restrictions, most of the old hands were there. In the grave context of the attacks against US hegemony and the symbols of globalisation, many of us felt we needed to be together in order to discuss, analyse and draw provisional conclusions. Indeed, many felt also they had to stand by MESA and make its meeting a success, since this gathering is usually accused of showing "too much understanding" toward the Arabs and Islam.
MESA, however, was not to be sidetracked. It worked hard and fast to bring experts' knowledge to bear on what was taking place on the ground. It organised a hurried plenary session to discuss the impact and consequences of the events of 11 September.
Even though the ongoing war in the region was not as bloody as it has at present become, the immense hall where the meeting took place was packed out. The audience, from the four corners of the world, was a virtual "who's who" of Middle Eastern studies. For instance, the American University in Cairo (AUC) president John Gerhart was among the attendees, as well as established journalists, NGO representatives and many activists.
As one of the panelists who had been walking those self-same Arab streets just a day before, my job, I thought, was to give this international audience a glimpse of the perceptions and emotions of 'ordinary' people (as distinct from their elites) in reaction to what had taken place in America. It was then that a big mustachioed man -- as the "New Republic" described him afterwards -- rose from the audience to protest against the use of the term "Arab street." Describing people in this way could overemphasise their emotionalism and even irrationality, he said.
But more respectable indicators backed up the analytical relevance of the "street" category to reveal what people really think. Subway conversations, letters to the editor, popular radio and television programmes, in addition to repeated discussions with the oft-cited taxi driver -- all of these things count.
Though my critic toned down his language later on, the question obsessed me. Indeed the term "street" is an over-generalisation and could be too easily assimilated with mob reaction, with its characteristics of extreme emotionalism, impulsiveness, and fickleness.
Yet even six months later, I feel that the term's benefits outweigh its costs. It is a rough barometer of spontaneous mass reaction in both democracies and non-democracies, especially in times of crisis. Moreover, focusing on the "street" balances excessive concentration on politicians and diplomats, and gives us an idea about politics from the bottom up. After another visit to the US last month, this time to Washington, the term "street politics" seemed both convenient and revealing for what is taking place between America and the Arabs. In short, it is a good analytical category to decode the present crisis of US-Arab relations, and also indicates the level of gravity it has reached.
ARAB STREET VS. US STREET: The first thing to note at present about the two "streets" is their increasing polarisation. There was tension on the streets earlier, but this tension is growing fast and each street shares part of the responsibility. For instance, the American street has been long-dominated by negative stereotypes about Arabs and Muslims. Many Arab-Americans see this negative stereotyping as the fault of the five Bs: the Arab as Bedouin, as bazaar mentality, as belly dancer, as billionaire and finally as a bomber.
The Arab street also has its stereotype about America and Americans: imperialist, pro-Israeli, violent, crude, and even immoral. But it also has positive stereotypes of the US, thanks to Coca-Cola, McDonalds, denim jeans, Hollywood and now the Internet. If the Arab street is to be blamed for one recent faux pas, it is its relative insensitivity to the real dimension of what the American street went through after 11 September. Even until now, the Arab street has been incapable of grasping the American street's restlessness, trauma, insomnia, increasing fears of terrorist attacks and basic insecurity.
CAPITALISING ON THE POLARISATION: But the increasing gulf between the two streets is aided by two traditional spoilers coming from the world of expedient and opportunistic politics: the electioneering obsession that characterises American politics, and the act of lobbying.
It is to be recalled that George W Bush made his way to the White House with a minority vote and stayed for a few weeks "in limbo," before actually receiving the right to occupy the Oval office. Most of the Jewish vote went to his opponent Al Gore.
At the moment, with congressional elections taking place this year and the presidential election campaign set for about two years, Bush does not want to inherit his father's failure to get a second mandate. Moreover, he shares Israeli governing party Likud's neo-conservative ideology and the notion of a crusade against "terrorism." According to this mind-set, the global system is dichotomised into black and white and any state, organisation or individual is either "with us or against us." Doesn't Bush base his policy on fighting an "axis of evil"?
As a result, both the governing teams in Washington and Jerusalem give absolute priority to the use of raw power as their preferred means of solving problems. In this context of crude vengeance, the adversary is dehumanised. In order to help domestic public opinion swallow this permanent state of war, all atrocities are depicted as "pure self-defence" or "collateral damage" against "savage cutthroats."
Surely, once international agencies are allowed to enter Palestinian refugee camps we will have horror stories about the depraved warfare, massacres and possible mass graves created by Israel's Defence Force (IDF). One of my Norwegian students who managed to enter the West Bank last week cannot now get herself to sleep properly. She still has a sense of guilt following her decision to come back to her studies rather than stay on the spot to carry out basic help. Probably, many Americans and Israelis, once they discover the magnitude of the human disaster in the camps, might go through the same experience of guilt and even shame.
To prevent this public opinion backlash, the Likud government has to portray its enemy as subhuman and absolutely beastly. This is what Israel's strong propaganda machine (from "respectable" mass media to active lobbies) is busy planning.
FRAMING THE "ENEMY": Ever since 11 September, the strong Jewish lobby in the US has wasted no time in using what many social scientists call "framing" techniques. Framing is simply a manipulation of popular beliefs to serve somebody else's purposes and hidden agendas. After 11 September, capitalising on the trauma of many Americans, both the Likud government and its lobby depicted the Palestinian National Authority as "terrorist" -- indeed just as terrorist, in every way, as the Afghan-Arabs who stormed New York and Washington with suicide-attacks by hijacking civilian planes.
Recently, during a huge pro-Israeli rally in Washington, former Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu prepared the ground for his political comeback in grand style by calling Yasser Arafat "Israel's Osama Bin Laden!"
As a result -- so the manipulation of minds goes -- Israelis and Americans are portrayed as being in the same trench fighting the same battle against the same treacherous enemy.
The message is both simple and strong. The more it sinks in among insecure Americans, the greater the gulf between the American and the Arab streets.
A WAY OUT?: There could be one, once the American street wakes up to the shocking atrocities of the last Israeli assault and realises that state terrorism is as bad as that of the fanatics. In fact, state terrorism is worse because of its superior power, sophisticated murderous technology and hence its greater capacity to maim, kill and inflict massive damage.
Palestinians and Arabs were not prepared to stand up to Likud's military assault, but they better be prepared for the next mass media and public opinion round. He who communicates his message clearly and convincingly in the coming weeks will not only win this battle, but could win the overall war.
* The writer is a professor of political science at the American University in Cairo (AUC) and at the University of Montreal.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page