Posted on 10/26/2002 9:24:32 AM PDT by Tancred
AMMAN, Jordan -- Since the tragedies of 9/11, Americans have been obsessed with the idea that the world, and especially the Islamic world, "hates America." Over and over we ask, "Why do they hate us?" And President Bush has repeatedly provided an answer: "They hate us because of our freedoms." Such an answer, of course, supposes that there is an unquenchable and irredeemable jealousy brewing beyond the horizons of human rationality; that we have simply become too big and powerful and "free" for anyone really to like us; and that therefore there is nothing we can actually DO about this state of the world. So we might as well just thumb our noses at it and do whatever we please.
This answer falls so far from the truth that underlies this moment in history that one has to wonder exactly what planet our leaders inhabit. The increasing rage against the United States found everywhere in the Middle East is based not upon some grand clash of civilizations and not upon personal envy. It is based upon realistic resentments of very specific American acts, policies and presumptions.
In fact, resentment and rage are growing so intense across the Arab world that one prominent Jordanian journalist, a reasonable and well-informed man who spent much of his youth studying happily in the United States, finally said to me on this trip: "I think the Middle East is going to be off-limits to Americans very soon. Americans will not be able to walk on the streets. You're embarrassing all the Arab regimes, and people feel that American policy has developed from being pro-Israel to anti-Islam to taking Iraq and its oil fields." Then he paused thoughtfully and added, "It pains me terribly, having studied in the U.S. all those years, having known all those wonderful, kind Midwesterners ..." His voice drifted off.
Other Arabs complain about the tone of the current American challenge to the region. "The way Bush presents his causes," one Jordanian professional woman said to me, using odd wording that was, however, evocative, "it is almost in a festival way, as if they are in a carnival. And we are the ones who suffer." Focus groups conducted by private firms were thought-provoking for the American embassy here. They showed first that many thought the Americans were cowardly in their desire to attack Iraq and that the Iraqi regime was the only one strong enough to say no to Washington. But then they voiced the opinion that America was the land of dreams, where everybody wanted to go.
In every discussion, whether with Egyptians, Jordanians or other Arabs, the bottom line was not that the U.S. supports Israel but that it supports it without any question at all, and that the U.S. has become responsible for the oppression of the Palestinian people. This was confirmed by a recent survey done by the Arab Thought Foundation here and written by Zogby International.
From a large study of Arabs in eight countries, the survey showed that the great majority felt positively about their personal future and shared the general values of Americans (they gave high marks to self-respect, good health and hygiene, responsibility, respect for elders, achievement of a better life and self-reliance). Their criticisms revolved directly around American policy toward the region, in particular American support for Israel's repression of the Palestinians.
Jordan in particular demonstrates an often schizophrenic case in the Arab-American relationship, because 1) the two countries are so close, 2) the government here has tied itself closely to Israel economically, but also to Iraq, and 3) people are seeing the results, even before a war with Iraq starts, of its potentially negative consequences.
On one hand, for an historically poor country with few resources and a total dependence upon Iraq for its oil, Jordan is doing very well, particularly in industry and trade, since its peace treaty with Israel in 1994. "All of our economic indicators are up, while those of the rest of the region are down," Dr. Mohammad Al-Adwan, minister of state for political affairs and information, told me. "We have had a growth rate of 4.1 percent; our financial market and exports have been up; our central reserves, which were down at one point to $20 million, now stand at $3.5 billion -- I think we're a big success story."
But already, orders for exports from the special economic zones, the strongly American-supported "Qualified Industrial Zones," are down this year. With 400,000 Iraqi refugees already having fled here, Jordanians are terrified of a war sending another million refugees here, as the Gulf War did in 1991. Jordanians, and foreigners working here on special programs that blend Western principles with traditional Jordanian ones, fear -- and see -- that present-day American policies could direct the culture back toward the stridently anti-Western attitudes that are always lurking just below the surface, especially in the Islamic fundamentalist population.
Indeed, one is stunned, returning here after an absence of eight years, at the fact that the majority of women of all ages now wear headscarves all the time. This should be taken as a clear warning that the region could return to strong anti-Western fundamentalism should a war shake the area. Our present war policies could lead to the undermining of moderate countries like this that are the model for the whole region.
In a way, the news is good -- for if the Arab world hates America because of its deliberate policies and not because of some deep and unaddressable cultural clash, the entire problem can be dealt with by examining and altering the policies. But the problem then, of course, is to address them.
As usual you're dead wrong, Georgie-Anne, I couldn't care less.
that there is an unquenchable and irredeemable jealousy brewing beyond the horizons of human rationality;
Yes, that's perfectly obvious for anyone who wants to look.
"I think the Middle East is going to be off-limits to Americans very soon. Americans will not be able to walk on the streets."
Very soon? Try now.
Other Arabs complain about the tone of the current American challenge to the region. "The way Bush presents his causes," one Jordanian professional woman said to me, using odd wording that was, however, evocative, "it is almost in a festival way, as if they are in a carnival"
Who was celebrating and cheering on September 11, 2001?
And we are the ones who suffer."
Typical Muslim self-pity. Americans, Russians, and Australians are dying in large numbers every day from violent Islamic terrorism. Who is suffering?
Focus groups conducted by private firms were thought-provoking for the American embassy here. They showed first that many thought the Americans were cowardly in their desire to attack Iraq and that the Iraqi regime was the only one strong enough to say no to Washington. But then they voiced the opinion that America was the land of dreams, where everybody wanted to go.
Not only eaten up by jealousy, but hypocrites and frauds to boot. This finding confirms the jealousy thesis that the author is trying to push. Of course they're jealous that they're trapped in their Islamic ratholes.
Georgie wants us to address the problem, hmm? She's in Jordan, perhaps she could ask the populace about their national street party last year on 9/ll. Do any of them think that Muslim terrorism on a grand scale in America might have something to do with our changed attitude? That we're still waiting for a decent wide-spread Muslim show of concern and sorrow? That Saddam Hussein has been playing shell-games for 10 years with UN inspectors while that whack-jobs' WMD programs go on? Oh, I forgot, the Jordanians were alone in supporting Saddam against the rest of the Arabic world in the Gulf War. These people are children who don't recognize the danger they are bringing on themselves.
Until and unless, Israel decides to relocate and American's find a way to run our economy on water propelled engines, the US will continue to have strong interests and ties to the Middle East.
And it hasn't been US policy oppressing Muslim's and Arab's. Rather, its their own dictatorial-totalitarian governments that have controlled the people for centuries and still do, till this day.
I guess by 'we" she means liberal Blame America Firsters, because most Americans I know don't care. Second GWB was referring to Al Qaeda and other anti-American terrorists when he said that, not the Arab world at large.
That is indeed the psychological root of the desire of many here to believe that is the cause. It presents appeasement as workable, and reinforces a desire some feel naturally or tempermentally, to react to hostility with submissiveness. And there is no doubt that if you ask many Arabs they will give explanations of this sort, some because they think it is a useful lever to change policies they want changed, many simply because it sounds more defensible or reasonable than the reality of the thing.
But we know it is not the real explanation. We don't have to ask them, we only have to look at what they *do* as opposed to what they *say*. The most superficial scan of the history of US policies and actions in the region and the uniform response those have evoked demonstrates that this "policy" explanation is false, whether conscious manipulation, conscious falsehood, or most plausibly just psychological self defense and self justification.
In 1979, Carter was paying billions to Egypt and arranging the return of Sinai, opposing any use of force by the Shah, and preaching human rights. The response was fanatic hostility, seized hostages, the assassination of Sadat.
In 1983, Reagan sent US troops to Lebanon to seperate Arabs from Israelis, arrange safe passge of the PLO to Tunis, and withdrawl of Israeli troops from most of Lebanon. The response was fanatic hostility, truck bombing of our Marines, near war with Syria, opportunistic hostage seizures.
In 1991, Bush sent US troops to expel Saddam from Kuwait. After a brief period of pro-US sentiment in Kuwait, the response has been fanatic hostility, with Ladenists denouncing the presence of US troops in Arabia, bombings at Khobar Towers, the Cole, etc.
In the 1990s, Clinton arranged the rehabilitation of Arafat, the formation of the Palestinian Authority, offers of 90% of the west bank, large scale economic aid amounting to billions of dollars, relentless pressure on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon and the territories. This systematic appeasement of Palestinian demands brought violent waves of suicide bombings directed at Israel, and also terrorist attacks within the US, e.g. the 1993 first attempt at the World Trade Center, and abroad e.g. the Africa embassy bombings.
Since 2000, W. Bush has called for greater democratic control of Arafat and sought the support of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Pakistan against the likes of Syria, Iraq, and the Taliban. The response so far has been the terrorism of 9-11 and often excuses made in defense of it by those we are trying to side with, as in this article.
Our policies toward the Arab world have not been stable over time. We have tried all sorts of changes, hard nosed and appeasing, pressuring Israel on this and Arab radicals on that, sometimes using diplomacy, sometimes money, sometimes our troops, often to protect Arabs, from Israelis or each other.
We get the same response from the sort of street sentiment reflected in this article, quite regardless of what we do policy-wise. The response does not shift with our policies. Our policies are therefore not the cause of the response. This is an empirical truth, not a mere opinion.
The only "policy" we might adopt that might get a different response (for a short while anyway) would be screaming "death to the Jews!" like the Palestinian street, and carpet-bombing Tel Aviv. When they say they dislike US policies, they mean they want to kill all the Jews and are frustrated that we don't help them do so. It is not even a matter of "let them", because they can't on their own, even with us staying out or occasionally protecting them from the Israelis.
But it would be psychologically difficult to admit (1) that only genocide would slake their thirst for a less "pro-Israeli" "policy" and (2) that the Israelis can beat the lot of them even without our help. It is much more appealing to pretend they would of course win if we didn't stop them from doing anything. And that of course they are oppressed by the great powers of the world, instead of occasionally protected from the consequences of their own impotent rage by those very powers.
This is indeed a deep cultural clash, and not a mere matter of our policies. We cannot change it by appeasing them. It is not, however, an "unaddressable" cultural clash. It is perfectly addressable - by them, not by us. When they give up their hostility to the US regardless of our policies toward them - when they stop trying to kill us as we protect and fund them - when the give up the unholy dream of millions of slaughtered Israelis, as some great achievement they are restrained from by nefarious foreign powers - then they will have addressed the deep seated cultural clash involved.
We aren't going to. We aren't the ones living in impotent and miserable squalor because of the conflict. They are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.