Heroically, the Arabs are freeing themselves from their authoritarian masters.
But can they liberate themselves from the fears, conspiracies and prejudices that also shape so much of their politics and identity? Their evolution to fully functioning democratic polities may depend on it.
Two principal bogeymen—Israel and the colonial power (AKA America)—continue to haunt the Arab world like ghosts in Charles Dickens’s A Christmas Carol.
Each of these spirits is grounded at least partly in historic and contemporary reality. But each has in turn been magnified and exaggerated into a system of logic that drives not just the lie but the big lie. And very often, these untruths are willfully conjured up by the Arabs themselves to mask their own deficiencies and to distract and rally public opinion.
Israel figures prominently and simultaneously in Arab hopes and fears. On one hand, the Jewish state can be a unifying force in rallying Arab pride and power. Consider the aftermath of Hezbollah’s successful use of high-trajectory weapons in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon war, when its chief Hassan Nasrallah for a time became almost a revered figure on the Arab street.
On the other hand, Israel is a source of dishonor and shame—and perhaps secretly a source of admiration too, which makes matters even more complex. How could a tiny country defy the will of the great Arab nation and make itself into the strongest military power and most technologically advanced country in the Middle East? For the Arabs, Israel is one tough and painful look in the mirror.
There's no doubt that Israel's own policies—from settlements to the occupation and treatment of Palestinians to its use of military power—feed Arab anger, rage and humiliation.
But let’s be clear. The Arabs themselves have turned David into an ugly and mythical Goliath. The anti-Israeli trope goes much deeper than mere criticism of a nation-state’s behavior. Israel has been elevated to a power (backed by America) that, along with international Jewry, has the capacity to shape the world arena, if not to control it.
The view among many Syrian oppositionists is that the United States hasn’t intervened against Assad because Israel prefers the status quo or, worse, an outcome in which the Syrians just bleed themselves through internecine conflict. Meanwhile, supporters of the Assad regime argue that the opposition is driven by pro-Israeli forces bent on eliminating the only Arab state that stands up to Israel and its American patron.
By implication, the view in much of the Arab world (and in Europe too) is that the pro-Israeli lobby holds America’s Middle East policy hostage and can dictate matters of war and peace at will. In effect, it has become and remains the default for any Arabs, no matter what their orientation, to simply blame whatever they don’t like—in the Syrian case, whether the survival or downfall of the regime—on imaginary omnipotent American policies serving exclusively the supposed interests of Israel.
Worse still are the anti-Semitic tropes that still compel and captivate the region. They’re not new. Go into any Arab bookstore in Cairo and Damascus and you’ll be presented with a smorgasbord of literary delights from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion to pamphlets about contemporary Jewish control of the banks and the media. When the spokesman for the current president of Egypt talks about shaking the sleep from the eyes of the Jews and liberating Jerusalem, he’s speaking not just for himself but to a well-primed audience.
Indeed the Arab Spring—which in some countries is starting to look like an Islamist spring—brings with it a whole series of dangerous religious tropes that are likely to inflame, not calm, an already volatile situation, particularly over an issue like Jerusalem. That public opinion is now going to be more influential in shaping the foreign policy of a country like Egypt will only keep the pot boiling.
The second group of demons consists of the great Western powers that have been intervening in this region for centuries. The Arabs have legitimate grievances against them. The history of this region is a running commentary of outside forces trying to impose themselves on smaller tribes for economic, religious and strategic reasons.
But at what point do the Arabs stop blaming the West and their intelligence agencies for much of what ails them? Is there an expiration date on the evils of the colonial legacy? When will polls taken in the Arab world find that a majority believes that it was indeed Al Qaeda that attacked America on 9/11 and not Israel’s Mossad or even America’s CIA; or failing that, that Al Qaeda is a creation of the CIA? Will America always be a convenient excuse to shift responsibility from the Arabs’ own incompetence and inability to construct fully productive and functioning societies where human rights, rule of law, prosperity and security are available to the majority of their citizens?
Conspiracy theories infantilize and prevent individuals and nations from assuming responsibilities for dealing with their real problems. The Arab spring was a critical but excruciatingly painful beginning. For the Arabs, freeing themselves from their demons—both real and imagined—will be harder still.
Aaron David Miller is a distinguished scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center. He served as an adviser to Republican and Democratic secretaries of state on Arab-Israeli negotiations.
Image: wanderinghome






Comments
Aaron David Miller wrote:
Okay, there's two ways to take this: Either as a howler, or as the product of someone so short-sighted that one can only marvel at the bubble they live in. Yes indeed, that is, of course to some significant extent we see many in the Arab world in thrall to those "fears, conspiracies and prejudices" about the Israelis and jews. But what about those same things afflicting Israeli jews in reverse and deforming *their* "politics and identity"? And indeed not just about Arabs? Is there *any* negative comment one can make about Israel that, for instance, isn't *immediately* and damn near *universally* believed in Israel to be anti-semitic? One could go on at encyclopedic length talking about the ludicrous degree of this, so let's just settle for two little blinding illustrations: For forty-plus years now not just the bulk of ordinary Israelis but Israel's *leaders* have predictably denounced each and every U.N. resolution or vote or etc. that has gone against it not just as the mere product of *Arab* anti-semitism, but indeed as the product of the entire *world's* alleged anti-semitism. And now, despite all he has done for Israel, and essentially merely because he refuses to have the U.S. attack Iran for it, look at the unbelievably common and popular understanding in Israel—as evidenced by poll after poll and newspaper columns and comments even from many of its politicians—that Obama is anti-semitic. And yet ... Mr. Miller here believes the *Arabs* have deformed themselves by fixating on their "fears, conspiracies and prejudices"? Without one mention of the Israelis' apparent belief that if you don't plunge your country into a war for their benefit you are an anti-semite? As noted, there's no doubt some not-insignificant truth to what Mr. Miller says about a portion of the Arab world's mindset being poisoned by thoughts of Israeli and jewish wiles and etc. But then ask yourself this: While you certainly see evidence of that in the Arab "street," it's a rather rare Arab *leader* today that you see any manifestations of this. So for instance we *don't* regularly see them getting up at the U.N. and promoting The Protocols of The Elders of Zion or other such crap. And the *entire* Arab League *has* offered to recognize Israel's right to exist. (Which offer Israel hasn't even deigned to respond to.) But what do we see of the poisoned minds in Israel? Mostly confined just to the least educated of the masses on the Israeli "street"? Oh hell no; like I say there's nary a single negative thing that happens vis a vis Israel and the entire world that you don't see many many official Israelis—and usually their Prime Ministers too—standing up and denouncing as effectively part of a vast anti-semitic conspiracy or mindset. Even, for instance, such things as the Goldstone Report, written by a jewish guy. And yet here's Mr. Miller, pretending that the only poisoned minds relevant to the Mideast situation belongs to the Arabs. Like I say, either Mr. Miller is being comedic, or he's suffering from the most extreme case of tunnel vision imaginable.
One of the most tiresome things about the ME conflict, is the pre-emptive victimhood claim by various anti-Israeli persons, that argues they are accused of antisemitism. Usually, this claim refers to claims of anti-semitism that never existed (Can anyone find _any_ denounciation of UNGA as such by Israeli leaders, since (say) 1980? Or any denouncing as such of Obama by Israeli leaders?), and is taken to a ridiculously extreme level (do Israelis or Jews really condemn _any_ criticism as antisemitic?) which is obviously false. This argument is often layed out way before anyone has even thought about accusing anyone of anything...I can't quite understand why they follow this rhetorical line. Is it to make the cases of antisemitism that do exist amongst the Arabs disappear from the public eye (after all, if everyone is supposedly accused of antisemitism, than the few actual accusations of such can be 'safely' ignored regardless of the evidence)? Or to trivialize the issue to create the same effect (same as where American coservatives talk about the "Race card")? Or as a method to gain sympathy? It is indeed a mystery. P.S. It's pretty trivial to find various instances of Arab leaders acting as such, especially when we consider they controlled the media until very recently, and _every_ TV series or commentry had their approval (implicitly or not). We can start with Assad Jr's comments to the pope...
cesium wrote:
Oh come on, cesium. All one has to do is go back to the very *last* U.N. appearance by no less than Israel's Prime Minister to see as open a charge as possible that essentially the entire U.N. and the vast majority of the entire world was immersed in the worst anti-semitism possible. So open indeed that despite standing in front of the entire General Assembly what did Netanyahu say but "I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame?" And just how stupid do you think people here are to not realize the obvious reason official Israeli leaders are careful not to openly call Obama an anti-semite? Official leaders of every stripe who live every day with the marrow-deep understanding that their country's very existence and certainly its fundamental health depends crucially on the constant and indeed daily firehose of money coming from the U.S.? So that we are to pretend that they would openly endanger even a drop of that by openly calling Obama an anti-semite and causing a negative reaction from Americans outraged at the recipients of that firehose worth of money doing so? Of course they do not do so openly themselves, but in fact what they *do* do is so close it still ought to outrage Americans: Just google "Obama anti-semite" or any such similar phrase and see the pure *tonnage* of such stuff appear on one's browser page by people who are otherwise long and concretely linked to this or that Israeli leader or political party or movement or etc. Or that believing Obama is an anti-semite is rare in Israel. Here, for instance, is Morton Klein, the head of an *American* jewish organization as reported in the J-Post just this last January:
And this being from *American* jews—for whom Obama is their President—we are to somehow believe that via some miracle the far-more fire-breathing Israeli jews don't share this attitude? Despite the tonnage that exact sentiment appearing daily in Israeli publications? Indeed, arguing as you do that there's not really any untoward focus on or concern with anti-semitism amongst Israelis says volumes about the degree of blindness on the subject and absolutely nothing about the subject itself. And this then just reinforces the argument that, in Aaron David Miller's own words, such blindness about Israel's own "fears, conspiracies and prejudices" have terribly deformed its very own "politics and identity." With no reason to believe that this has not done so to Israel even worse than anti-semitism has deformed the politics and identity of the Arab world.
With that last U.N. appearance by the Israeli P.M. being of course Netanyahu, addressing the General Assembly in only last September of 2011.
Israel (amd American Jews) do not like Obama's ME policies, and they feel the UNGA is biased against them. None of this go as far as antisemitism or even involves accusing someone of antisemitism. Are Israelis and Jews banned from disliking someone because antisemitism exists? --- Your position is uttery twisted. Because some people hate Jews irrationally, you hold we should ignore Israeli concerns - In short, we should treat Jews worse because some people hate them... That's ridiculous. And the second part of your position is an invallid analogy between Arab antisemtism and Jews not liking someone's policies which diminishes actual antisemitism and actual Israeli concerns. It also ignores the prevasive existence of conspiracy theories in the Arab nations which have no analogy (that I know of) in Israel.
Ach, you're just mumbling now cesium. Of *course* Israelis and jews are banned from disliking anti-semites. Sticking however to the issue that Aaron David Miller raised, yes it can certainly be seen to some degree—particularly on the Arab "street"—that an invalid intellectual poison (in the form of anti-semitism) has deformed and damaged "much of their politics and identity." And then getting to the counter-issue that I raised I pointed out that it might be blindingly seen—and not just on the Israeli "street" but among lots of Israeli official *leaders*—that a an invalid intellectual poison (in the form of seeing damn near the entire *world* as being anti-semitic) has deformed and damaged much of the *Israeli's* "politics and identity." And after you challenged to cite one Israeli leader condemning the entire U.N. as anti-semitic since 1980, all I had to do is go back to the very last time an Israeli P.M. addressed the General Assembly just last September when Netanyahu *flamboyantly* did so. To which you now retreat totally from your challenge and say, essentially, oh that's just because the entire U.N. *is* "biased against [jews]." cesium, sensing the genuine nature of your feelings here and your goodwill all I can say is that second only to Aaron David Miller's blindness himself in failing to see how his charge against the Arabs applies at least equally to the Israelis if not moreso, I think you are really just illustrating my point to the same dazzling degree. Unlike Mr. Miller's assertion about how the Arabs are deforming their very "identity" with their blindness however, I wouldn't go so far as to assert that Israelis or jews are doing so to theirs. But I certainly see that Israelis' blind belief that they the entire world is just is just near totally immersed in an unrelenting anti-semitism is indeed deforming the living hell out of their politics. To the point now where previous admirers of Israel and Israelis like me are wondering how the hell to feel sorry for Israel when those politics result in Israel truly becoming a pariah among nations for its actions and suffers accordingly given Israel's own choice to go down the path that it is.
Stupid mistype on my part in my first line above: Of course Israelis and jew are *not* banned from disliking anti-semites, as indeed everyone should at the very least be disliking them.
Here you step from nonsense to being misleading. I said Israelis [edit: and other Jews] think the UNGA is biased against Israel. Your addition of "[Jews]" is incorrect. There are plenty of reasons the UNGA is biased vs Israel - like having an automatic 56 member OIC group voting against Israel, Arab oil money, general International Relation cynicism which often sacrifies small countries, etc. Antisemitism is far far down the list if it exists there at all - had Israel been populated by Christians they'd probably be just as happy to castigate it. Again, you're doing two twisted things:<br> A. Because there are antisemites in the world, and because Israelis and Jews sometimes (though not very often, actually) complain about antisemitism, you use the possible existence of the accusation to automatically dismiss Israeli or Jewish concerns ("ah, there they talk about antisemitism again" - this is even when they do not mention antisemitism at all! Or even without the slightly self-reflection that the accusation (when it's actually given) might actually be true). This has the de facto result that Israelis and Jews are penalized because some people hate them, and sometimes Jews point out the hate. That's twisted. <br />B. Because Arab are in the thrall of idiotic and self-serving conspiracy theories, you hold somehow there must be a parrallel - even without evidence to the contrary. [some edits were made to clarify and fix spelling errors] <br /> [edit2: Note that I asked rhetorically if Jews and Israelis are banned from disliking a politician (in general) - not if they are banned from disliking _just_ antisemites....]
No I hold that there is a parallel—and indeed one of an even worse nature—but believe I did provide what is not just evidence of same, but gobsmacking evidence of same. And as I said I believe could go on and on citing additional such evidence, but I also believe that the truth of the matter has been on such abundant, spectacular display of late especially that I don't need to beat that horse with even one more lick and am instead totally comfortable with people out there making up their own minds based on what they themselves have seen and heard.
Ah, I see now, (and while I don't know how it makes a difference), of course you're correct that they totally possess that right to dislike both. My apology for misreading you my friend.
Very well, we'll let the reader decide. Suffice it to say that I don't think Israeli concerns (like claims the UNGA is unfair and biased in its approach or disliking Obama's ME policies) should be dismissed under "they're claiming antisemitism". For that matter, I do not think Arab claims (at least the relatively sane ones, not the 'we caught spying Zionist birds' type) should be dismissed in a similar manner (judging by Miller's articles, he does not do either). That type of cheap psychoanalyzing is highly patronizing and is morally twisted.
With respect, I feel Mr. Miller misses the point. Many Arabs _must_ be aware this vision of Israel is nonsense, and the 9/11 was commited by Arabs, and so on, regardless of what the polls say. For example, if they truely believed Israel had such power, how could they even think of credibly threatening it, much less promising to destroy it as some do?. What Miller misses is that these lies serve their owners, both internally and externally. Externally, it helps them avoid responsibility and acts as an excuse to be even more obstinate. For example, in one of the first meetings after 9/11, US diplomats has to spend half an hour convincing the Saudis that it wasn't committed by Zionists... So instead of the US berating the Saudis, the result was the opposite! Internally, it helps assuage internal rifts by redirecting all agression against external enemies, and when internal infighting is inevitable, it's a cudgle against the internal rivals... One should simply be aware of this cultural trait, and call out its owners when they spit out too much bullshit.
[Edit: erased my post since it was in the wrong thread]
[edit: I made another double-post. Sigh]