Yesterday we published comments from some experts on the anti-Saudi backlash in America and elsewhere in the West in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the US. Today experts discuss another aspect of the same problem. They also express their views on some other issues raised by the attacks — especially whether the terrorist fury and the Western reaction to it validate Samuel Huntington’s theory about the clash of civilizations.
Questions:
1. In the light of the intimidation and violence targeting Arabs and Muslims in America and Canada in the aftermath of the tragic events of Sept. 11, what would your advice be to the Arab and Muslim communities living there?
2. It has been said in some quarters that the New York/ Washington attacks point to an imminent ‘clash of civilizations’ as Samuel Huntington had predicted. There are others who see it as a clash between the whole civilization and terrorism. Your comments?
Answers:
1. This is a very dangerous phenomenon and it reminds us of what happened to the American Japanese living in America after the Peal Harbor incident, and nobody wants this to be repeated with the Arabs. I have to be fair and say that the Western official and media dealings with the problem have been very positive and good, and it will hopefully help keep this problem confined within very narrow limits. As for the Arabs and Muslims living in the West they must now show their sympathy for and understanding of the Western position against terrorism. They should more than ever before show respect for and abide by the laws of the country they live in. They should also make extra efforts to strengthen social and friendship relationships within the community they live in. On the other hand there is a need also for additional education to the Western societies to help them distinguish between Islam and the activities of some terrorists groups who use Islam to label their movements and actions.
2. A few days ago Samuel Huntington appeared on the CNN and he said that the events of Black Tuesday do not reflect the clash of civilizations he spoke about. The reason for this is the speedy condemnations of the events by all Muslim countries. But the events themselves are very dangerous, he said, and could lead to the clash of civilizations if the zealous on both sides chose confrontation. In my opinion there is a great need of wisdom in Muslim countries and the West in dealing with the developments and events . The clash is not in the interest of anyone, and we should do whatever we can to prevent this from happening.
— Othman Alrawaf
Professor, King Saud University, Riyadh
1. I have already commented on this topic.
2. The definition of civilization is contested and if you have a contested definition about a concept or an idea it is very difficult just to use it as a fact and in any case it’s inappropriate in this context. As far as terrorism is concerned it is a different matter. There are all kinds of groups engaged in terrorism. For instance you do have Muslim terrorist groups that have there own issues and you also have terrorism in Latin America which deal with issues completely different to the Middle East. It’s like the war on drugs, which is not effective because it has moved around the globe with its own financial system. Terrorists have there own set-up in order to move around the globe.
The head and officials of government have not to go down the route Berlusconi suggested, they have to be clear about what they are saying.
— Barbara Allen Roberson
Professor of Political Science, Waric University, UK
1. Such communities have already made clear their rejection of terrorism as a means of achieving political goals. If they are intimidated they should appeal to the public and to Christian communities and parishes directly for protection.
2. I do not accept either definition. Terrorism is not a new feature of life though the scale of terrorist damage is clearly increasing. Terrorism has been practiced by major governments who have killed great numbers of innocent civilians in pursuit of military and political aims. Of course there are differences between (post) Christian and Muslim cultures but that need not involve a ‘clash.’ On the contrary we can learn from each other to our mutual advantage. After all we are all signatories to the UN Charter and we have a common base on which to build.
— Bruce Kent
Vice President, Pax Christi (UK)
1. I do not know if intimidation and violence continue to be used against Arabs and Muslims in North America. If so, I believe the best response is through the legal systems of those countries, and collective action. Communities speak with a stronger voice than individuals. American and Canadian citizens enjoy the same rights, regardless of their religion. Citizens of Arab and Muslim countries should take their concerns to their national representatives through consulates, embassies, UN missions.
2. I am firmly convinced that the people who plotted and executed the Sept. 11 attacks sought to provoke a clash between the Muslim world and the West. The only way to ensure that the terrorists do not succeed in their aims is for Western and Muslim states to cooperate closely, on the basis of mutual respect and concern for the priorities and sensitivities of each other, to ensure that a ‘clash of civilizations’ never occurs. Failure to make a common front against terror poses dangers to the Muslim world as well as to the West. The groups which have been associated with these attacks share a common objective of achieving their vision of an ideal Islamic state and society. Their ultimate target is thus not the United States, but countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Thus, all civilized nations have a common interest in ensuring that a ‘clash of civilization’ never occurs.
— Eugene Rogan
Professor of Political Science and ME Affairs, Oxford University
1. Arabs and Muslims in America and Canada live there because — unless they are refugees, such as Palestinians — they choose to do so, either because of the economic or political benefits they obtain. They can only endure the current wave of violence, in the hope that it passes whilst trying to counter the lies and misrepresentations that engender it in as dignified a way as possible. They should also call upon the states in which they live to fulfill their most elementary of duties — that of protecting the rights and safety of their citizens. Beyond that, they should question whether the disadvantages and dangers of being within a minority community, whatever the traditions of freedom of expression and association, outweigh the advantages offered by the liberal traditions of North American society and polity. It is that balance that would decide their ultimate course of action — but they have a right to be who and what they are and they have a right to have that right respected.
2. One of the greatest ironies of the present terrible situation is that both the ideology associated with Osama Bin Ladin and with the right-wing in America is based on the Huntingtonian vision of the clash of civilizations — that is the one thing they share in common. Both analyses are wrong; the present situation arises from political, not civilizational, factors. There are clear causes for the current crisis — and terrorism is not necessarily irrational. Unless the causes — Palestine, US-Saudi ties, Iraq, impoverishment and Western support for bad governance — are addressed, no amount of policies, intelligence or military action will solve the current crisis. The West has, out of triumphalism and cultural blindness, created many of the conditions that produced the calamity of Sept. 11 and, unless that policy is corrected, the whole pattern will be repeated. Retribution is, no doubt, inevitable but retribution without understanding and retribution alone will merely make a repetition more, not less, likely — that, not a clash of civilizations is what is inevitable.
— George Joffe
Cambridge University and expert on North African Affairs
1. The overwhelming majority of Arab and Muslim communities in North America will have been just as shocked by the events of Sept. 11 as any other community. The best they can do is to try to communicate this to their non-Muslim neighbors with statements and gestures of support. Ordinary Americans have been deprived of information about the Middle East and Islam, because it has not, until now, appeared to be very relevant to them. Muslims can help by explaining their region and their religion and showing, by example, that neither pose a threat to Western values.
In the past year, Palestinian activists have been very active in bringing the Palestinian case to the attention of the American public by emulating the tactics of the pro-Israel lobby. This has not been done aggressively, but rather in the spirit of trying to inform.
2. As far as I am aware, we haven’t heard much from Huntington lately. His "clash of civilizations" thesis provided a useful intellectual cover for those strands of opinion in successive US administrations that were trying to find an enemy to replace international communism. Perhaps their motive was to maintain high spending on defense and intelligence in the post-Soviet era. Who knows?
The doctrine has clearly misfired since it has demonized Islam and created enemies. It is also a pessimistic doctrine that sees the glass as half empty rather than half full. In other words, it prefers to ignore the similarities between cultures and exaggerate the differences.
The clash is far from inevitable, as long as each group respects the values of the other. The best way to do this is through education. The faults lie on both sides, however. Some voices in the Islamic world are as dismissive of Western values as some in the West are of Islam.
— Harvey Morris
Editor at Financial Times, London
1. These are all serious issues and they will not be easily or quickly settled. It should be stressed that the US and Saudi authorities are working hard to ease tensions. American officials from President Bush on down to hundreds of state and local officials have strongly and repeatedly spoken out against racist attacks on Arabs and Muslims; and American civic and educational leaders have also spoken out forcefully on this issue. On our campus here at Georgetown University the administration, faculty, and students have rallied to reassure our Arab and Muslim students. So far, the number of incidents has been lower than might have been expected. But regrettably there is likely to be some disproportionate surveillance, "profiling" and detention of people who "appear to be Middle Eastern." My advice for Saudi students in the US is to stay put: there may be some inconveniences but there is no need to flee.
2. Those who perpetrated the incredibly massive and brutal attacks on innocent Americans may have believed that they were engaged in a "clash of civilizations." They would like the rest of us to believe that too and take up sides against each other. We ought not to fall into that trap. Muslims should not forget that America has defended Muslim causes and protected Muslim communities. Americans should not forget that Islam basically is a religion of compassion and mercy, and as such works in harmony with the other great monotheistic religions.
— Micheal Hudson
Professor of International Relations, Georgetown University, Washington
1. This topic has already been dealt with.
2. There is only a clash of civilizations if that is the way people wish to interpret recent events. It would be more true to say that a clash seems to have taken place between those who believe they largely manage world affairs at the moment (the West, led by the United States) and certain ideologically-driven marginalized people of the Muslim Middle East who refuse to accept the West ordering their lives. The latter used the most effective weapon available to people who cannot field conventional armed forces.
If one supports the use of political violence (which every single state which maintains an army in reality also does, even though they like to pretend only terrorists use political violence) then there are horrible consequences.
The events of Sept. 11 broke the rules of conventional war. Marginalized people are unlikely to feel obliged to play according to rules of war which guarantee that they will lose.
In practice, however, the Free World is the small club of rich powerful states, which are not particularly interested, in true freedom for everyone. Otherwise they would not apply intolerable pressure on weaker Middle Eastern polities. They are not particularly interested in others having democracy. Jordan and Yemen, which enjoyed a greater level of popular representation in government than other Arab states, were unwilling to lend support to the US led coalition against Iraq in 1990. Both were punished by the US for this stance. Previously, the regime in Algeria scrapped election plans when it was clear that the Islamic party would win the election. The European states and the US supported this abandonment of the democratic process because they did not like the likely winner. These two instances indicate that the West is not seriously interested in democracy for other states if this leads to disagreement. But what else is democracy for?
There is another way at looking at reactions. We can all retreat into ideological positions. The use of terms like crusade suggested precisely this state of mind. There is no doubt that the Wahabis, for example, inhabit a deeply ideological world that is not amenable to reason, and are unlikely to respond to new ideas which call into question their received ideology. Or we can choose to be liberal. In which case we can asks such question as: how and why did this situation arise? Are there ways in which our apparent adversary can be persuaded to change his behavior? Are there ways in which we should change our behavior? Are there things we have misunderstood about my adversary? Are there steps which can be taken to change his view of us? These are questions which only liberals with moral courage will insist on asking and carrying through. Because they are questions which suggest that violent acts are counter-productive. They are also questions that suggest that different societies can and should learn from each other.
— David McDowall
Researcher and expert on Palestinians and Kurdish Affairs
1. Their role is now very important and it is up to them to be understanding and try and heal the serious damage to community relations that has occurred and this is what they have been doing. I think it is counterproductive to try and link the event with a political grievance or anger against the US in a way that almost justifies the act. You hear a lot of condemnations followed by "but", the "but" is very damaging and should come at a much later stage than this. It is still too soon to think or act rationally vis a vis what has happened. I am also concerned that some of the statements by Arab/Muslim organizations and individuals condemning the attack and apologizing for it may have been interpreted as an admission of indirect association or feeling of guilt. The image of Arabs/Muslims has suffered greatly from the event and there an important responsibility that lies on the shoulders of Arab and Muslim communities living in the West to bring it back to a more objective perspective. It has also been said that this is an Arab/Muslim reaction to globalization. I think it has to be stressed that whatever the validity of these ideas are, and even if there is such a thing as a clash of civilizations, it has to be dissociated from the New York/Washington attacks. The perpetrators of this act feed on the contradictions and aim to exacerbate them, but it is crucial that they do not seem represent them. There is certainly a problem and I am not saying that it should be ignored, it will take a long time to heal the wounds and the rift that has been created.
2. No, and here I want to ask what do you mean by ‘the West’? There is a real grievance against US policy in some areas and this has to be dealt with. The important point is that these existed before Sept. 11 and had to be dealt with even then. It is obvious that the planning of the operation predates the A-Aqsa intifada for example. This means that the operation would have gone ahead even if peace process would have succeeded. The policy toward Iraq had been in crisis before Sept. 11 and it still is.
The aim of the perpetrators is to feed on these grievances and destabilize the region. The way to counter this is to deal with the grievances and maintain stability in the region. It is a very delicate and important task that politicians and policy makers have to face. I think the situation has become much better since the beginning of this week. We are still at a stage where doomsday scenarios are being thrown about.
— Nadim Shehadi
Director, Center of Lebanese Studies, Oxford University
1. Put pressure on people of influence in your communities, in government, the media, student organizations and so forth to bring this situation to an end. Organize meetings and other events to put a positive message across about Arab culture, Islam, the Middle East.
2. The rhetoric and action coming out of Washington in the first week after the atrocities in the US echoed the thesis of Samuel P. Huntington to a considerable degree. One of the ironies of this situation is that to some extent at least, these pundits were also echoing the language of Bin Ladin and others who also talk in terms of a clash of civilizations. Since then there has been some recognition that this is a dangerous course. Politicians and others have been at pains in recent days to make it clear that this is not a clash of civilizations nor is it a war between Christianity and Islam.
— Paul Lalor
International Institute of Strategic Studies, Edinburgh University.
