As I have been traveling around the U.S. discussing my new book Arab Voices, attempting to shatter the myths that many Americans have about Arabs, I frequently get the question, "but do Arabs understand us?"
In response I note that because of globalization, many aspects of American culture are known world-wide. Despite this degree of familiarity, I acknowledge that just as there are many myths that cloud Americans' understanding of the Arab World, there are myths believed by many Arabs that distort their understanding of America and the American people.
Let me describe a few:
First there is the assumption that American policy formulation is deliberative, based on reasoned understanding of problems and consequences. It is this myth that often gives rise to conspiracy theories.
For example, when America invaded Iraq and it rapidly became clear that the entire enterprise was going awry, some Arabs believed that instead of being a massive ill-conceived blunder, the goal all along had been to create chaos, weakening Iraq thereby making it dependent on a continued American military presence. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The reality is that the ideologues who dominated the Bush administration's policy formulation actually believed their own rhetoric. Seeing the world through their distorted interpretation of what ended the Soviet Empire, and colored by their (let me be blunt) racist view of Arabs, they really believed that a demonstration of overwhelming force ("shock and awe") and firm resolve, backed up by military might, would be sufficient to topple the dictator and liberate the people of Iraq. In their mythic view, they saw the Iraqi people, cowed by power and a firm resolve, greeting American forces with "flowers and candy", with democracy blooming and then spreading across the Middle East. The neo-conservative "planners" of this fantasy-turned-debacle, didn't listen to the more experienced professionals in the military or the diplomatic corps who repeatedly warned them that Iraq would not be the "cakewalk" they expected and that the Iraqi people would not look kindly on an occupation.
That the ensuing resistance and sectarian violence, the unleashing and emboldening of Iran, and the resultant regional insecurity were unanticipated was not accepted by many in the Arab World. That the world's one remaining superpower could simply have been such a blunderer was beyond belief -- so conspiracies had to be invented to explain away this reality.
Inventing logical intent to make American policymakers appear smarter than they, in fact, are, is born of myth number one.
Next in line is the myth that the Israel lobby and, by extension, the Jewish community, control all the levers of power in America. It is true that many American Jews have become successful in many areas of U.S. corporate and cultural life. But it is also true that most wealth and power in the U.S. is still in the hands of good old-fashioned White Anglo Saxon Protestants.
There can be no doubt that those who lobby for Israel are a force to be reckoned with, but several facts must also be considered: right-wing Christian fundamentalists (who form 40% of the Republican Party's voter base) have a major role in shaping policies toward the Middle East; polls show that most American Jews (and Christians) do not support hard-line Israeli positions; and the myth of the invincible AIPAC is just that -- a myth.
The problem is that this myth is so widely believed, that it has taken on a life of its own and is accepted by AIPAC's supporters and opponents alike. The idea that "if you cross them, they will defeat you" is so widely believed that it causes many in Congress to simply "go along to get along" out of fear. But the reality is quite different. Many of those elected officials who claim that AIPAC beat them (for which, AIPAC gladly accepts the credit, since it fuels the myth of their power), lost for other quite unrelated reasons. And I know of too many instances where AIPAC has tried to defeat candidates and couldn't, and where they tried to defend friends in Congress who ended up losing their elections.
The bottom line: these lobbies are strong and they do exercise an undesirable influence on policy -- but it is the result of unwarranted fear, more than agreement -- and in many instances they lead to actions not supported by the majority of Americans (even Jewish and Christian Americans for whom these lobbies claim to speak).
Another myth is that Americans are increasingly intolerant of Muslims and Arabs, and that America is a hostile and unwelcoming place. The reality is quite the opposite. It is true that we've had a spike in anti-Muslim and anti-Arab hate crimes, but official statistics establish that the numbers of these incidents still pale when compared, for example, to anti-Semetic acts directed against Jews and Jewish institutions.
More to the point, the far more difficult to measure gestures and acts of support for Arabs and Muslims are too numerous to mention. One specific incident comes to mind. During the stressful period when the Park 51 controversy was raging and that nutty preacher in Florida was threatening to burn a Quran, I had the honor of participating in an extraordinary meeting in Washington. The meeting brought together in one room: the heads of the National Council of Churches USA (representing every major Protestant and Orthodox Christian denomination), leaders from the US Catholic Bishops Conference, leaders from most major Jewish groups (representing Reform, Conservative, Orthodox, Conservative, Reconstructionist, the Jewish Community Relations Councils, etc), representatives of major African American religious groupings, and the heads of the Islamic Society of north America and the Muslim Public Affairs Committee. We sat for three hours and debated and passed a strong resolution condemning the intolerance and bigotry toward Islam that was on display in New York, Florida and Tennessee. The group then went to a well-attended press conference to present the resolution. The next day, however, this important consensus statement received only scant mention in U.S. and international media -- the press was too busy covering the nutty bigot/provocateur in Florida. Also unreported were the many inter-faith (Muslim/Christian/Jewish) gatherings that came together in cities across the U.S. to defy the bigots and chart a course for cooperation and understanding
They say "bad news is big news." And "the loudest voice gets the most attention." But bad news and loud voices don't define reality. So just as extremists and haters in other societies do not speak for those societies, neither do they speak for all Americans.
Despite the inexcusable actions of some, the anger of others, and some bad policies put in place by our government, America remains a welcoming country and Americans continue to be a generous and hospitable people. And while, in this period of economic stress and political insecurity, some communities do experience hardships, this remains a country where immigrants can find a welcome home and work to realize their dreams. And it happens every day.
In short: American policy-makers aren't as smart as many believe them to be; American policies don't always reflect the will of the American people; and Americans are more hospitable than press accounts would reveal them to be.
Now this short piece can not explore and explode all the myths about America in the same detail I devote in Arab Voices to shattering myths about Arabs. But consider it the beginning of a needed discussion to help us bridge the deep divide that has made it more difficult to understand each other.
Dr. James J. Zogby is the author of Arab Voices: What They Are Saying to Us, and Why it Matters (Palgrave Macmillan, October 2010) and the founder and president of the Arab American Institute (AAI), a Washington, D.C.-based organization which serves as the political and policy research arm of the Arab American community.
James Zogby: Israel: Using WikiLeaks to Build a Straw Man
Chris Korzen: Head of Catholic Bishops Conference Backs Culture Warrior Bill Donohue
You said: “America in no way supported Hitler----Europe did, but America did not. Further, we managed to help the Phillipines become a democracy in the late 1980s and I am proud of that.Your indictment of the U.S. is hugely exaggerated
Reply: One specific example may enlighten you a bit. From 1986 to 1989, during the military-backed government of President Suharto, in Indonesia, Paul Wolfowitz ( leading war monger and supporter of American attack on Iraq) was the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Indonesia.
His utter contempt for democracy and human rights including his strong support for General Suharto of Indonesia is well known. Suharto was one of the worst mass murderers and torturers of modern era and also an easy winner in the international ranking of most corrupt leaders and the best friend of the USA, comparable to our friend Husni Mubaruk of Egypt who is one of the best friends of USA for 25 years. The US can not talk about regime change in Egypt because, Mubaruk has not become a rogue like Saddam Hussein.
Why did the US blindly and immorally support Suharto? Because he offered great profits to American investors to whom he opened Indonesia’s rich resources for plunder and hence very supportive of sharks like Paul Wolfowitz and American Military Industrial Complex.
MIC of USA which remote controls the American political decisions love to do more profitable business under monsters like Mussolini in the past and Husni Mubaruk now.
perhaps not the creation of chaos; but weakening Iraq (at least militarily) and making it a US satellite were clearly part of the strategy; no blunder here; and more or less "mission accomplished".
The famously-derided-by the Bush administration but obviously prophetic 'Pottery Barn rule ' shows what the Republicans wanted out of all that.
If Bush thought he was getting a U.S. satellite out of the deal, well, you know we don't consider him very bright, do we?
Reasons I don't know.. but they if they could prop up governments that will listen in iraq, Afghanistan, then Iran we could get cheaper oil and have a hot spot in the world(drugs, resources) When things really get bad we would have allies set up, and it would be much easier for us to compete against super powers.
They knew what they were doing and they were not dumb, bush might of not been the brightest on stage, but they knew what they were doing, or otherwise Cheney turned into another person when he switched bushes.
It touched on all the truths.
I think there's a certain element of the haters being louder because they fear being outnumbered in what is increasingly becoming a more-pluralistic nation: it's kind of like on LGBT issues, the hate's more virulent (and thus dangerous,) but that's in part because it's no longer something the haters can just consider normal.
Speaking of those issues, a lot of Muslim nations picked a bad week to expect much sympathy from me ...having just voted in the U.N. to say summary executions of LGBT people are just ducky with them.
"We reserve the right to just up and kill people for being like you," isn't much of a moral high horse.
Let's look at it from another ethnic and national viewpoint entirely and see how it seems. Vietnam. Twenty years of meddling in their civil war. At least eight years, through at least two presidential administrations, of outright military invasion and massive bombing of a country that was not attacking ours. Something like three million Vietnamese dead. At what point should the Vietnamese have told one another, "Hey, it's only a blunder. You know those goofy Americans."
This is the result of a long and sustained campaign of intoxication, which continues to this day. The Arab masses are bombarded with "news" and "commentaries" (with the distinction between them left deliberately unclear) which present the US and the West in unfavorable light. Methodologically, they range from misrepresentation to exaggeration to complete fabrication and outright lie. They are spread by "militants" (some of them comment here on HP) often with the connivance or direct participation of Arab regimes and media. Apart from the "conspiracy theories" that you mention (which are repeated daily on HP – in defiance of the comment moderation policy – and hourly on Al-Arabiya, Al-Manar, Al-Jazeera, etc.) another set of conspiracy theories deals with 9/11, 7/7, etc. These claim that the terrorist acts were secretly perpetrated by the US government, CIA, Mossad, etc. etc. Such conspiracy theories are widespread in the Arab world, to the extent that President Obama decided to address them during his Cairo speech.
There is nothing either innocent or benign about these "myths". They appeal to the most vulnerable layers of Arab populace and use insidious cultural levers, such as the "blood vengeance" issue. They are part of a deliberate smear campaign, aimed among other things at de-humanizing Americans (and Westerners in general), making them more "deserving" of terrorism against them.
And Prez Obama's policies since then only confirmed the fears of the conspiracy theorists! These theories are not just born out of thin air.
Mr Zogby forgot to mention something about the invasion of Iraq and the occupation. How can something NOT have the intention of chaos if the purpose was based on lies in the first place. No matter how you slice it, it is a LIE that was promoted. So, what happened after the 'shock and awe' campaign was not planned, obviously.
I think the problem with the 'west' is, they think EVERYONE thinks like them.
Mr Zogby needs to stop using the term 'Arabs and Muslims' as if they go hand in hand. They absolutly do not. This is very offensive to me as a person who is not Arab. We do not share Arab values and culture. We do embrace then within the diversity of Islam. However, Islam and Arab are not the same thing.
In what way? I do not understand your point.
So...people like me have to 'answer' for honour killings, women who cant drive in Saudi Arabia, viels and burkahs, and other things that dont exist in our culture.
Mr Zogby makes industry of creating ideas...nothing of substance. He has Americans caterorized, down to how many beers they drink. He can 'cater' to a thought, or create an illusion simply by using a question and a map. This article is another illusion backed by the carefully crafted illusion of popularity that he creates.
The Organization of the Islamic Conference groups together 57 countries which define themselves as "Islamic". It purports to be the "voice of the Ummah" (the Muslim "nation"). Arabic is its official language, along with English and French.
Non-Arab Muslim countries tend to automatically align with the Arab ones on political issues, such as the Middle East conflict. Military conflicts between non-Muslim countries and Arab countries are often interpreted as "an attack on Islam".
Finally, when you state
>>>"So...people like me have to 'answer' for honour killings, women who cant drive in Saudi Arabia, viels and burkahs, and other things that dont exist in our culture."
you forget to mention that Wahhabism is actively exported from the Arab Peninsula to all Muslim countries and to the Muslim communities in the West. The Madrassas of today's Pakistan hardly reflect the old tradition of Pakistani Islam. Saudi money and preachers have turned the tide towards an extreme, intolerant, fundamentalism interpretation. The results are visible in the number of suicide bombings: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2010/1105/Deadly-bombings-in-Pakistan-target-mosques-killing-more-than-70-worshippers.
However, when Zogby says "Arab and Muslim", he is talking about a specific category of people and fails to contextualize the term he uses. His AAI group represents Arabs in America, who include many Palestinian, Lebanese, Syrian and Iraqi Christians, whose viewpoint is often utterly disregarded, especially when the Israel-Palestine conflict is painted simplistically as Jews against Muslims.
It is unfortunate that when he is trying to be inclusive within an albeit limited group, he is easily misunderstood.
On the bright side everyone from Paris to Bejing knows the Colonel, Sanders that is.
Why does it matter whether the neocons believed their own fantasies? They were wrong, but the US still has 50 000k troops and twice as many mercenaries there.
I don't know whether current neocon intentions are to create chaos in the Middle East. I just know that's the result.
As for AIPAC, it represents the extreme Israei right wing, and doesn't care what moderate American Jews think.
I think that they just didn't care what price Iraq would pay. The hubris of taking Saddam out and finish Sr.'s "unfinished business" seemed to outweigh any rational argument of whether the war was really necessary, and, once the country was occupied, what's next.
Are we talking about Arabs or Muslims?
Islam isn't a nationality or race it is an ideology.
It would be better to make this distinction.