Monday 28 February 2011

Now is the Middle East's Chance for Rediscovery

The Arabs have lost sight of their history. This is something true of myself, and true of other Arabs of my generation. My own understanding of Middle Eastern history only began about a year ago, when I began reading up on it for lack of formal education. The more I learn of my history, the more aggravated I am by my education. I know my own story - though it is the exception in some respects - is true of many Arabs of my generation.

The problem with the education of Arabs - and Muslim Arabs, as most of us are - is its love affair with the origin story of Islam. Any Muslim with even a modicum of Islamic knowledge can rattle off the story to you: how the Prophet was visited by Gabriel, how he kept God's word a secret between himself and his wife at first, then revealed it to his family, and then to the greater Meccan public. They can tell you of the migration to Madina - the hijra from which the Muslim calender begins; the conflicts between the Jewish tribes and the glorious victories against great odds; the return to Mecca, where no blood was shed in a peaceful takeover; the Prophet's death, and the subsequent era of the four 'rightly guided' Caliphs. They will tell you that this era ended with the assassination of Ali Ibn Abi Talib.

That story is drilled into our heads from the first moments of our lives, and retold again and again by parents and teachers. It was the Golden Age of Islam, we are told, before Muslim society was corrupted. The Golden Age, before divergent sects evolved. The Golden Age, when Islam was most triumphant.

But little else is taught. Oh, sure, you get some knowledge - about the greatest heights of the Muslim empire in the 9th and 10th centuries and the Israel/Palestine conflict. But all this is in the shadow of the Golden Age. Saudi Arabia is perhaps the greatest testament to how revered the Golden Age is, where, despite all its potential to be a major Middle Eastern and world player, the monarchy chooses instead to rule as though they still lived in the 7th century.

It says a lot that the greatest testament to the Golden Age is the cultural failure that is Saudi Arabia. The royal family is morally corrupt, not just by Islamic standards but by broader, universal standards, as evidenced by stories such as this, where a prince battered to death his manservant. Women's rights have barely penetrated the country, where men and women are segregated and female independence is denied in almost all aspects of life. Every weekend, hordes of Saudis visit Bahrain to enjoy its more liberal values - from being able to enjoy their day without it being dictated rigorously by prayer times, to going out clubbing and drinking.

Perhaps you see where I'm going with this. The Golden Age, if it even existed, has today eclipsed the history of the Arabs, and the 1400 years between the mythical Golden Age and the present day take a back seat - if they aren't completely wiped out of memory.

And so we come back to my original point: that Arabs have lost sight of their history. The irony perhaps is that all our history has been discarded for a single slice of it - the Golden Age. More a myth now than reality, we are bludgeoned by retellings of this tale, until it is the only truth we believe in. People yearn for its impossible purity and mourn how very far away it is from modern corruption.

This thinking is poison. It fundamentally rejects all the progress that Arabs have made in their history as a people. What of the contributions to the sciences, philosophy and history, most notably those of Ibn Khaldun, the medieval thinker, father of economics and social sciences? What of the preservation of the ancient Greek literature that would later fuel the Renaissance? In more recent times, what of the cultural renaissance of the Arabs, Al-Nahda, when the Arabic language evolved and literature, poetry, music, theatre, cinema and modernity blossomed?

Nothing is said of these things because, by the way of thought that places the Golden Age of Islam as the single greatest era in the history of humanity, all progress since then becomes impure and worthless. Perhaps the greatest atrocity of this philosophy is how quickly the people have forgotten Al-Nahda which began in the 1820s in Ali Pasha's Egypt and, though it waned over the years, only really died with the rise of political Islam - the Iranian Revolution, the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Qaeda and their ilk. The more I continue my independent studies of the Middle East, the more astonishing it is to me that I was completely unaware of the cultural revolution that was still in motion only two generations before me. I know that my education in Bahrain was unorthodox - I was only in the system for 3 years, between the ages of 10 and 13. But I lived in Bahrain for 7 years, and yet I had no clue. I'm sure, if I were to ask my cousins, the most average Bahrainis, they wouldn't be able to give me a concrete answer about Al-Nahda.

So I say it again: this thinking is poison. Not only does this glorified myth discard all Arab achievement, it also justifies Arab victimhood. The people mourn for the days long gone - they see Saudi Arabia, and it is a caricature of the Golden Age of Islam. And yet so desperate are the people for this farce that they either become victims powerlessly trapped in the wrong time, or, in an effort to restore that time, resort to terrorism - as Al-Qaeda does.

How did we reach this point, where political Islam has sent to oblivion so much of Arab culture and history? I would say that it's due to the nigh-constant state of war the region has been in. Lebanon's bloodly civil war, coupled with the Israeli invasion, decimated one of the intellectual and cultural centres of the Middle East. Iraq, historically another hub of Arab thought, has been ruined by dictatorship and war. Even Egypt, where Al-Nahda began, started decaying after Nasser's death, war with Israel and the assassination of Anwar Sadat.

Compounding this, the Middle East is humiliated time and again by the West - Kuwait owes its existence today to American intervention, America destroyed Saddam's feared dictatorship, and Israel, blindly backed by America even as recently as ten days ago and a thorn in its neighbours' side, is a constant reminder of our governments' ineptitude. This only further severs the people from their history and drives them further into fantasising of a time that, while no doubt of great importance to the Middle East, is enlarged beyond realistic proportions.

But there is hope. Times are changing. The Arabs are hopeful, and for the first time in decades are empowered. Nothing now will stop the wave of revolutions. In Libya, we find Ghaddafi is isolated in Tripoli. In Oman, the protests have begun. In Tunisia and Egypt, only the first battle has been won, and the protests for reform continue. America has never seemed more powerless, facing condemnation for their veto. Germany, whose guilty conscience created an unwavering ally for Israel, saw Angela Merkel snap at Benjamin Netanyahu for failing to further the cause for peace with Palestine.

And, where democracy in the Middle East was something to fear for the strikingly large possibility of Islamism spreading, now the world is seeing that, above all else, what the people want is equality, respect for human rights and freedom of expression.

So in light of this pivotal moment in Arab history, it is time to cast away the shadow of political Islam and the adulation of the mythical Golden Age we have been gripped by. It is time that we Arabs rediscover what was lost to repression, defeat and victimhood: our scientific traditions and literary contributions, and revive the cultural movement which died only in living memory. Our future is tied to our past, and it is not beyond our reach to grasp it.

9 comments:

  1. Thank you for this excellent commentary. It helps to give the protests in the Middle East an extra dimension.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fantastic piece, mate!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I remember Al-Nahda! Though I never knew what to call it, and I've never been to the Middle East. It seems that all my life the area has been falling as the hard line "Islamists" have tightened their grip.

    But Nasser became president the same year I was born, and I remember a different Egypt, and a different Middle East when I was a kid.

    I hope you're right, and these new democratic movements don't get derailed by religious extremists, but from what I've seen so far I doubt that will happen, they seem to really want liberty and equality as you wrote. I also hope a strong and independent Egypt will be able to finally do something about the Palestinian situation.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Really excellent. You managed to expalian how we have become prisoners of an imagined golden history and lost our chance to live hnourably and harmoinously with our times

    ReplyDelete
  5. First of all, I just want to say that I don't want to take this down the religious debate avenue.

    You're right in what you say, in that there are other people than the Arabs in the Middle East, and always have been. One of the bad effects of Islam was the purging of pre-Islamic history. In a way, to the average Muslim, 570 AD (the birth of Mohammad) is pretty much the beginning of history. The Arab Muslims, if that term is specific enough to your liking, are very aware that they were once the greatest power in the world, and still stinging from their fall from grace. That's already changing though, as evidenced by the revolutions bearing little to no connection to religion. It's not about Sunnis or Shia or /Muslims/ being dominant, it's about the people having the power in their own hands. Religion does not have to be a constraint, but the Arabs allowed it to be. But now, in the waves of revolutions, it no longer acts to restrain them. And so I think that the people at large are no longer overshadowed by that out-of-reach Golden Age.

    The European Renaissance was a rediscovery of antiquity and moving away from the strict doctrine of the church. While the Arabs are, perhaps, beginning to move towards an era of renaissance, or perhaps enlightenment, I don't think it'll come about by looking to pre-Islamic past. Rather, it'll flower when we are no longer shackled by the mythical Golden Age - and I would venture to say that we no longer are. What it all comes down to, though, is an expansion of ideas past the traditional, and I suppose that could come about in either form (looking to the past, or looking to the future).

    Also, you make the point that Jews were expelled from 'our' lands and that Muhammad 'conquered' Medina. Medina was not 'conquered'; the town let Muhammad and his followers in and coexisted with the Jewish population, later falling under his leadership. And the Jews, as well as Christians, lived under Muslim rule with a lot of freedom. Though they were distinguished and separated from the Muslim population, they also served important roles in the economy/bureaucracy. They did live as, to some extent, second-class citizens. But they were not subjected to tyranny such as the European Jews were.

    I understand the relationship between Germany and Israel, based on German guilt for WWII, but I'm curious to know what justice it is you think the Muslim empires of the past owe both to the Jewish people and to you in particular. The Portuguese occupied Bahrain in the 16th Century, but I can't go to Portugal and demand compensation for a period of history no one today was alive for. Personally, it doesn't make sense to me that you (seemingly) would, but your culture gives you a different way of thought and I'd be interested to hear it. You say that /we/ must learn to treat /you/ as equals, but the burden of pushing for equality falls on both parties' shoulders. And since Israel is the dominant power here, it falls on them to attempt for reconciliation - which they haven't, as of yet. As a disclaimer I'd just like to say that I'm not pinning the blame of this problem on all Israelis, but more on the government itself.

    Also, I can't help but notice a hypocrisy here. You are saying that the Muslim Arabs should let go of their claim of the land, and yet you boast of the ancient Kingdom of Israel and that your religion is older than Islam. And what of the civilisations that preceded even Israel? Just worth a thought: you hold Jewish history with pride just as Muslim Arabs hold their own.

    Thanks for commenting. I'd be interested to hear your response.

    ReplyDelete
  6. My issue is not with the Muslim empires of the old-old past, but with the Muslim empires of the recent past and the present. My culture has a long memory, yes, but really we care mostly about what happened to our grandparents and what will happen to our children -- like anyone else. Why reference Muhammad's time? Because where Muhammad once fought some Jews, people now take away the context and the reasons to simply teach that it is righteous to fight Jews because Muhammad fought Jews.

    I agree that the Middle East has been ruled by despots of various forms for almost all its recent history. Self-governing republics have been rare, and there is therefore no grounds to blame the entire people for history beyond those events with mass participation. Some Arab figures, such as Emir Feisal, even went against the grain of their times by declaring friendship between our two peoples.

    This being said, the issue is not German guilt in WW2. The issue is that Hajj Amin al-Husseini and his cohort (see: Azim Pasha, as I believe his name is spelled), the familial and ideological founders of what became the anti-Zionist wing of Arab-Islamic nationalism, were Nazis and Nazi collaborators themselves. The policies they enacted, and the doctrines they taught, imported Nazi judeophobia into the Arab world. That judeophobia has never been entirely rooted out, and as part of the totalitarian fever-dream it goes part and parcel with the hearkening back to a Golden Age that you address.

    ReplyDelete
  7. As to reconciliation, one cannot make reconciliation for a war one didn't start when one is less than twenty kilometers wide at the neck. The notion of going back to the 1947 Partition Plan borders or the Green Line armistice lines from 1949 for anything less than full peace, perhaps even federation and cultural cooperation, simply looks too dangerous for us while we find ourselves staring down the barrel of Hamas's guns and down the shafts of Hizballah's missiles -- and with the entire Arab world cheering to them, "itbah el-yahoud!"

    The Peele Commission put forward a Partition Plan for the Levant in 1937 that would have created equality. The Zionists accepted it wholeheartedly, but the Arab despots chose to ally with the Axis. The UN put forward another Partition Plan in 1947, with the same result modulo the lack of Nazi Germany.

    Had the answer to either of those plans been "Yes", even a grudging yes, instead of "Never!", there would have been no wars and no Naqba. Instead, Azzim Pasha declared that "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre."

    After that first war came a mass expulsion of roughly 800,000-1 million Jews from Arab-Muslim countries, Jews who spoke Arabic as their native tongue and followed Arab customs. This was done via government measures (the despots, again), but also via mass persecutions, rioting, and pogroms. They were hunted down for their collaboration in Zionist plots, for the schemes of the International Jew and the Elders of Zion -- for fictions!

    The rejection reocurred after the 1967 war. Just after the war, before the settlement movement (which I condemn) gained any strength, the Israeli government offered the return of all territories taken in the war in exchange for mutual peace and recognition. Their sole actual demand was that Jews be allowed equal access and equal treatment in the holy areas of Jerusalem. The despots turned this one down, too.

    And after those come the various "peace process" endeavors, such as the talks of 2000, 2001, and 2007. I will certainly say that the Israeli government was too taciturn in the 2001 and 2007 negotiations, that an outgoing government ought to have tried its best to make the historic treaty, but everyone on all sides agreed at the time that Yassir Arafat made the mistake of his life by turning down the proposal made at Camp David in 2000.

    Once again, what result came from the determination to win everything or die? Death and suffering on an even more massive scale.

    What of the civilizations preceding Israel? Persia is still there. I'd love to visit someday, b'ezrat ha'shem. I don't know about the ruins of Assyria, but I'd like to see that too if I could enter that country without a death sentence. Egypt, I hope to visit a free and healthy Egypt!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I would say that one problem is in the feeling of victimhood. The Arabs feel victimised by the Israelis, and that justifies judeophobia and extremist acts. From some documentaries I've watched, it seems that some Israelis, too, seem to feel victimised by their neighbours, and that propagates extremism on their side as well - though perhaps in different forms.

    So I think this is the time that might change. Since the people are being empowered by the revolutionary wave sweeping the Middle East - and the world - perhaps we'll soon be able to agree on peace, finally. Israel supported Mubarak and later Omar Suleiman, against the revolutionaries of Egypt. But if Israel is to now at the very least positively accept the rapidly changing political makeup of the region, it will make the regimes more willing to accept peace with Israel.

    On most of your points, I generally agree - especially on the judeophobia justified by the 'Golden Age'. But my knowledge is too limited to really debate with you. Hopefully that'll change soon, though.

    Thanks for your thoughtful comments though. It's very interesting to hear a Jewish opinion on the matters, as I very rarely do. I'm actually currently looking for books on the subject of Israel, can you suggest any?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Bloody good post! I must agree with E.Z. Gottlieb about Israel though. Israel is the only liberal democracy in the region and I would argue that the Palestinians are a thorn in their side, not vice versa.

    ReplyDelete