Issue No. 611
Opinion
Previous issue
Site map
|
|
7 - 13 November 2002 Issue No. 611 Opinion |
Current issue Previous issue Site map | |
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Recommend this page | ||
The wrong go-betweens
Washington's current PR campaign in the region is destined to backfire, argues Gamil Mattar*
I do not have the slightest doubt that many Americans, including those in high places, are worried about the rapid deterioration in ties between the US on one hand and Arab and Islamic countries on the other. Many Americans, writers and academics included, have voiced concern over the erosion in the popularity of the US, its values and way of life, not only in the Arab and Islamic worlds but also in Europe. I was therefore encouraged by the news that the Bush administration has earmarked massive funds to improve the image of the US in areas inhabited by Arabs and Muslims.
The image of America in the Arab and Muslim worlds is at a nadir. True, during the third quarter of the last century the US was the subject of intense criticism in this region, but most of this was motivated by ideological differences. The average Arab has never harboured any personal rancour against the Americans and their way of life, and generally their democracy and human rights were admired. Arab communist and left- wing groups begged to differ, but even under Nasser's government, one that was in perpetual dispute with the US, no attempt was made to turn differences into deep-rooted hatred.
In the early 1960s there was a brief phase of excitement in Egypt over a possible rapprochement between Nasser and Kennedy. Kennedy was then assassinated, before he had the chance to carry out promises made in letters to Nasser.
In the early 1970s, when Sadat invited Nixon to Cairo, the US president was given a warm reception. Sadat may have gone out of his way to impress the US president, but the public warmth of his welcome was real. America was not the object of public rancour back then.
Now the US is sponsoring conferences and seminars in Arab and Islamic countries, in an effort to mend the rift. Obviously, it is hard to wipe out the damage done by the 11 September attacks and their aftermath, but it is necessary to try. Over the past few years resentment directed against the US has not been the exclusive domain of leftist and Islamist doctrinaires. It has seeped into the back streets.
The resentment is constantly fuelled by US connivance with Israeli brutality. It is compounded by the steady stream of condescending, if not outright insulting, remarks made by US politicians and writers. US foreign policy has become disdainful of the peoples in this region, their governments, their culture, and their religion. Meanwhile, Israel's wishes carry weight in Washington, more weight than those of the Arab countries combined. Israel may follow expansionist policies, break the bones of Palestinians, kill and maim at will, and the Americans never fail to look the other way when they are not being actively supportive. Little wonder that Israel's neighbours are concerned.
In Egypt the public is finding it increasingly hard to accept that their government has signed up for peace with Israel, placing itself in a vulnerable military position, at a time when US- guaranteed peace is turning into a charade. There are no guarantees that Israel will not try to reoccupy areas from which it has withdrawn. Israel has special ties with the Americans, and the latter have so far failed miserably in their role as unbiased intermediaries. If Israel were to violate the peace agreement, what would the Americans do to stop it?
The Arabs have displayed commitment to peace. They have reduced their military expenditure, reduced the level of their military preparedness and partially altered the school curricula. Israel remains armed to the teeth, thanks to US support and cooperation. The Israelis are on a constant. Meanwhile, Egyptians hear the sounds of war and bloodshed on their eastern borders. They are alarmed by Israel's use of tanks and heavy weapons in breach of peace treaties. As time goes by, intimations of martyrdom and nihilism supplant the rigour of doctrine and ideology, and resentment travels from the narrow circles of activism to the broader vistas of the public psyche.
I was initially relieved to learn that the US administration wants this situation reversed. I imagined that intelligent and unbiased Americans would be trying to figure out what went wrong and do something about it. But all of the meetings so far sponsored by the US government have been planned and organised by US Zionists. The conferences held in Indonesia, Qatar and Washington were organised by people associated with the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee. Now, how do you expect anything good to come out of that? How do you expect dyed-in-the-wool Zionists to be objective when their loyalties are so skewed?
I don't want to get into the details of the Lavon Affair in the 1950s, when Israel attempted to undermine Egyptian-US relations. This case is well known. The Israelis and the Americans are aware of it, and the Egyptians are unlikely to forget it.
With all due respect to men such as Marin Indyk and Dennis Ross, one must point out that America's current PR campaign is an exercise in futility. Conferences are being organised, with impressive agendas and a cast of luminaries, but the real issues are not broached, and for the simple reason that Zionist Americans have no interest in steering the debate in the right direction.
Who needs a dialogue between Muslim clerics and their Christian, or Jewish, counterparts? Such debates, even if useful, are beside the point. What about the content of US movies and articles demonising the Arabs? These are the type of things that poison the atmosphere, that send the wrong message to ordinary Americans. I am not denying that the opposite happens here. Our public is equally susceptible to anti-US rhetoric spread by preachers and journalists. Perhaps people on both sides of the divide should engage more in dialogue, real and virtual. Perhaps they should take part in cyber conferences, or visit college campuses and meet students and staff. Generally, they need to talk more, rather than follow an agenda prepared by people with no real interest in Arab-US friendship.
I have no quarrel with Zionists who want to promote the interests of their own tribe. But we have a tribe of our own, and interests of our own. We need the sympathy and understanding of average Americans, and a chance to prove that there is no historic, geographical, or cultural reason for them to hate us. A word of advice to the Americans: implement your programme of populist diplomacy, but let the traffic flow both ways. And don't appoint as emissaries of love the same people who have striven for the past 50 years to foment hatred between us.
* The writer is director of the Arab Centre for Development and Futuristic Research
|
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: weekly.ahram.org.eg Updated every Thursday at 20.00 GMT, 10 pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
