Community posts

Two narratives

16/10/2010
Author : Hichem Karoui
First, there were rumors in France about vague threats. Nobody paid attention. Then, a story run by Sky News was taken over by other media and propagated
 
First, there were rumors in France about vague threats. Nobody paid attention. Then, a story run by Sky News was taken over by other media and propagated. Lately, came the publication by the US Department of State of a warning against travel to some European countries, which startled me and aroused curiosity about the kind of intelligence that permits such alarms…

In France, officials gave no clue about the existence of a real threat, although they keep repeating: yes, there are terrorists at large, which they assume we don’t know. All we saw so far are speculations at the eve of great strikes that may be very upsetting to the government. Meanwhile, the alarms whether they are founded or not, seemed like telling potential terrorists: careful! Don’t do it now. We’re watching. Later maybe; when you see that things calmed down.

And here I come to the last speech of Tony Blair in New York. He reportedly said that the West is being outmaneuvered by violent Islamist extremists. Unbelievable, isn’t it?

Blair was the best ally of Bush in the anti-terrorist campaign and the rush that ensued 9/11. Today he says: “a narrative that Muslims were under attack from the US and its allies, who act out of support for Israel, had been allowed to take hold, aided by websites and blogs.” And he states that “it will be impossible to defeat extremism without defeating the narrative that nurtures it.”

Well done! But two questions need answers: 1- Is it a narrative without any kind of basis in the real world? 2- Is it an orphan narrative without similar or parallel in the West?

I think the West is still misinformed about the real reasons of anger in the Arab and Islamic world. That’s why the Western leaders see and try to tackle the symptoms without seeing or tackling the roots of the malaise.

And who informs the Western Leaders? Their intelligence apparatus in the first place. Well. Take the US intelligence agencies. They have been over-assessed because the US has the technology and means to exploit the “mine” of intelligence better than any other state in the world, especially since the fall of the USSR. There used to be a tendency to believe in the omnipotence of the agencies of security such as the CIA, NSA, etc... Thanks to the movies industry. The boom in communications technology has so greatly contributed to the myth that the Americans themselves have started to believe in too until the tragedy of September 11 made everybody realise that the United States is very poorly informed about its own internal security. And if it is misinformed about its own safety, how can she claim to provide it to the allies, for example?

A government ill-informed, even if it is the world’s most powerful – and perhaps because it is the most powerful, can make bad decisions and make fatal policy errors. The most direct consequence of such behaviour is that the US government will seek to engage all its allies on a political line which, because it took the wrong foot, will never reach its objectives and thus contribute to discredit the whole alliance.  There are several clues that tell us that despite their apparent agreement with respect to the overall objectives of the US administration, many allies (Afghan, Pakistani, Arab and African leaders, etc...) do not see the same way the objective. This may be not a simple difference of opinion with no impact on reality, but a fundamental disagreement. 

Examples: for many Lebanese – including Christians – Hizbollah is a political party like any other with sits in parliament, and most significantly they recognise he has won the right to political participation for he defended the national territory against Israel. In the Palestinian territories, no one will speak of Hamas as a terrorist organisation: the movement has won a landslide in 2005. And nobody, neither from the Palestinians nor from foreign observers, ever seriously challenged the election results. If the US and Western allies were committed to the cause of democracy in the region, what more could be achieved to convince them that democracy was taking hold in Palestine? Normally, the democratic election of Hamas should have been satisfying. But the problem is that Hamas is a “terrorist” organisation for them and so is Hizbollah.

If such are the premises, no US administration will find enough Arab and Muslim leaders capable of following up cogently with any political process agreed upon in “exceptional” conditions. Clearly, the narrative Blair was talking about would not take hold as it actually does if you remove the soil in which it gets its seeds planted, grown and harvested.

The fact is the West does not want to face reality: one has to recognise that these societies as sophisticated and democratic as they could be are almost handicapped by their own fears to which they seem to understand nothing. They feel threatened and they do not want to admit that they created their own monsters while dealing with Muslims, Arabs, Palestinians, etc., unfairly. It may happen that it is not real threats from violent fanatics they face, but their own conscience full of guilt.

To defeat extremism, we should work on narratives of both sides, not a single one. If a certain number of Muslims get convinced that the West is aggressive towards Islam, do you really think that the kinds of campaigns we now see on the Western media are likely to convince them of the contrary? Each time, these warnings are issued, Muslim communities in Europe feel stigmatised and not safe. They also feel the same thing when they hear the mumbo-jumbo about Muslim traditions, clothes, rites, etc.

So, the narrative saying that “Muslims are under attack from the US and its allies” could not be fathomed without mentioning another narrative (in the West) conveying all the negative stereotypes about Islam and saying: “Muslims are invading Europe. They are taking our bread and our riches. They are polluting our environment with minarets. The clothes of their women are an insult to our conception of freedom. And above all, they hide potential suicide-bombers and terrorists.” Should we remind anybody that with such a discourse, several European extremist right-wing leaders have been able to gather enough voices to make traditional conservative governments seek also to gain these voices by shooting the same target?

 The Gulf Today, October 9, 2010

 

 
Keyword search
 
Report inappropriate content

You need to be logged in to rate and comment on articles.
Click the log in or register button in the top right corner of this page.
Add rating
 
Wednesday, 23 May 2012
le plus populaire du journal

le plus populaire de communité

le plus populaire des partenaires

Logon