Issue No.588
Opinion
Previous issue
Site map
|
|
30 May - 5 June 2002 Issue No.588 Opinion |
Current issue Previous issue Site map | |
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Recommend this page | ||
Matters of principle
Restoring calm in the Middle East is possible but requires that the US take a critical look at how it deals with countries in the region, writes Gamil Mattar*
Just as the crisis appeared to be veering towards the unknown, it was defused. Fighting was approaching Gaza, from which it could have easily spread to Khan Yunis and the traditionally off-limits Rafah. The reputation of President George W Bush's Administration was at stake, and at the US State Department frustration was mounting. Meanwhile, in the Arab world concern was running high over the steady stream of advice and threats coming from the US.
Within this context, and as the American public was beginning to relax a bit concerning the war on terror, criticism in Washington became less subdued about the disproportionate influence that the Jewish lobby wields over the US administration. The previously unmentionable observation that Israel was abusing its close ties with the United States was spoken.
But even if the calm holds, much more is required to avert disaster: if the Palestinian resistance is quashed -- whether at Israeli or Arab hands -- and if the Arabs do everything America wants them to do, the United States will not become the darling of the Arab world. Indeed, it will not even be less hated than it is today.
The American political elite dropped the ball when in the aftermath of 11 September it failed to confront the "why-do-they-hate-us" question. Instead of seriously assessing the causes of anti-Americanism among the peoples of the Middle East, the US chose to bully the world into submission. Arabs and Muslims took the brunt of US ire, and have since received almost daily "instructions" from the United States. They were told how to run their lives in a way that suits and would perhaps, eventually, win them the Americans' approval. So far, advice has come only from one side. America, it seems, does not take counsel from others.
But non-Americans have a right and, in fact, a duty to give the US some advice. Everyone who agrees to participate in the dialogue between the West and non-West is entitled to voice their views. A constructive dialogue cannot take place if one side monopolises the role of counsellor. Whether the US decides to act as an insensitive imperial power, or as a leader of a community of nations, it must listen. And if it were to listen, it would find that others have plenty of advice to give.
In the last year alone, dozens of European, Asian and Latin American countries have voiced reservations about US foreign policy. The Arabs have tended to be more reticent: aside from reminding Washington of its vital interests in the Middle East, Arab capitals have not contributed much.
The primary cause of the hatred that the US generates abroad is found in the cavalier manner with which it steamrolls over the cultures and interests of other nations. European intellectuals are calling on the United States to bring its foreign policy practices in line with its ethical principles. The United States, it has been observed, is in a position to revive democratic participation in international relations. Such a course of action is appropriate to a country that wants to be a superpower, and not merely the world's mightiest state. It is within the United States' power to act less imperially and still safeguard prosperity and international security.
Some find it hard to give America this kind of advice, even though it demands much more of the Arabs and other peoples. Added to that, the stakes for non-compliance with Washington's directives are high. Indeed, the US is telling the Arabs that if they wish to stay on its good side they must change their ways.
If the Arabs were to advise the US, what courses of action would we suggest? For starters, the US government should ensure that it responds to the extraordinarily powerful Jewish minority in a more balanced manner. I can only imagine the turmoil that would accompany an open discussion in the US of this topic: the accusations of anti-Semitism, the charges of being soft on terror. Still, quite a few Americans are talking with unprecedented candour about the influence of the Jewish lobby on the US political system. Several Americans and Europeans have pointed out that freeing America from its undue influence would improve US relations with dozens of countries and millions of people in the Middle East and the Islamic world.
The United States should require Israel to abide by international norms. No other country is capable of this task, and no other country would benefit more from the outcome. As long as Israel clings to its belief that it should enjoy a special status, the Middle East will remain a powder-keg of hatred. Several Western leaders have already come to understand that Israel's behaviour is a major source of hatred between East and West.
The increasing incidence of governments using religion to bolster their legitimacy or keep the opposition at bay has, for some years, been a major cause for international tension. Religion, when it inspires foreign policy, causes severe, and sadly familiar, complications. This matter, sensitive as it is, requires tactful handling worldwide. Even in the United States, there is an obvious need to encourage the separation of state and religion. The Americans and Europeans have made a point of asking Arab and Muslim countries to tone down the religious element in their policy-making. It is only fair for the Arabs and Muslims to ask the West, particularly America, to do the same.
There is something else we could advise the Americans to do. The US media should agree to desist from insulting the religions and cultures of other nations. At least a section of the US and European media has intentionally encouraged rancour and hatred against specific nations and religions. What is needed is not censorship, but a measure of sensibility, and this goes for Hollywood as well as the media establishment in New York and Boston. The image of Arabs as camel riders, bazaar traders and corrupt officials is not what worries me here. What is disturbing is the media campaigns defaming Muslims and Arabs and casting them in the role of incorrigible villains.
I have noticed a worrying feature in the dialogue between the West and non-West. Interlocutors, on both sides, who have scant knowledge of Islam have been debating the finer points of religious doctrine with casual abandon. It is my conviction that the dialogue of cultures and civilisations should remain confined to policy and international norms and not venture onto the thin ice of theology. The dialogue among religions is not the same thing as a dialogue among cultures. To conflate the two would be to give extremists an opportunity to undermine the dialogue.
The Americans should remember this: no one hates the US because it is rich, democratic, safe, or strong. When people do express rancour towards the country, it is because they hate injustice, slander, hegemony and arrogance. The United States could be a great country, but only if it were to remain faithful to its principles.
* The writer is director of the Arab Centre for Development and Futuristic Research.
|
 |
| |||||||||||||||||
| 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 |
