December 20, 2002

IF YOU READ NOTHING ELSE TODAY:

Iraq and the Arabs' Future (Fouad Ajami, January/February 2003, Foreign Affairs)
There should be no illusions about the sort of Arab landscape that America is destined to find if, or when, it embarks on a war against the Iraqi regime. There would be no "hearts and minds" to be won in the Arab world, no public diplomacy that would convince the overwhelming majority of Arabs that this war would be a just war. An American expedition in the wake of thwarted UN inspections would be seen by the vast majority of Arabs as an imperial reach into their world, a favor to Israel, or a way for the United States to secure control over Iraq's oil. No hearing would be given to the great foreign power.

America ought to be able to live with this distrust and discount a good deal of this anti-Americanism as the "road rage" of a thwarted Arab world -- the congenital condition of a culture yet to take full responsibility for its self-inflicted wounds. There is no need to pay excessive deference to the political pieties and givens of the region. Indeed, this is one of those settings where a reforming foreign power's simpler guidelines offer a better way than the region's age-old prohibitions and defects.

Above and beyond toppling the regime of Saddam Hussein and dismantling its deadly weapons, the driving motivation of a new American endeavor in Iraq and in neighboring Arab lands should be modernizing the Arab world. The great indulgence granted to the ways and phobias of Arabs has reaped a terrible harvest -- for the Arabs themselves, and for an America implicated in their affairs. It is cruel and unfair but true: the fight between Arab rulers and insurgents is for now an American concern. [...]

A reforming zeal must thus be loaded up with the baggage and the gear. No great apologies ought to be made for America's "unilateralism." The region can live with and use that unilateralism. The considerable power now at America's disposal can be used by one and all as a justification for going along with American goals. The drapery of a unanimous Security Council resolution authorizing Iraq's disarmament -- signed by the Syrian regime, no less -- will grant the Arab rulers the room they need to claim that they had simply bowed to the inevitable, and that Saddam had gotten the war he had called up.

In the end, the battle for a secular, modernist order in the Arab world is an endeavor for the Arabs themselves. But power matters, and a great power's will and prestige can help tip the scales in favor of modernity and change.


This is an impossibly idea-rich essay by one of the more temperate and intelligent commentators on the Middle East. Posted by Orrin Judd at December 20, 2002 10:37 AM
Comments

In 1921-22, British policy in the Middle East, which pulled French policy along with it, was entirely controlled by the belief that Moslems in India would erupt if the British did not support the Sultan in Istanbul.



The other alternative was to give the U.S. the mandate for Syria-Palestine, but the U.S. said no.



Turned out the Sultan didn't make it, the eruption in India came from Hindus, not Moslems, and there has never yet been an Arab interested in or capable of organizing a government.



What is the most worthless thing in the Universe? Arab opinion.

Posted by: Harry at December 20, 2002 1:29 PM
« AGAINST WHIGGERY: | Main | IN MIDDLE EARTH--A FIGHT TO THE FINNISH: »