Main Page | Month Archive | Email Updates | RSS Feed | Print Version

The Public Diplomacy Blog is intended to stimulate dialog among scholars, researchers, practitioners and professionals from around the world in the public diplomacy sphere. The opinions represented here are the authors' own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the USC Center on Public Diplomacy at the Annenberg School.

CANDOR AND CONFLICT
MAR 16, 2009 - 12:15PM PDT
Posted by Rob Asghar
All posts by this author

Writer Usama Hussein recently reported on an increase in both anti-Semitic and Islamophobic attacks in the United Kingdom, including one attack against a London synagogue and one on the daughter of a Muslim leader in London.  The fact that such violence came after flare-ups in Gaza showed many nations that a top public diplomacy priority involves facilitating real dialogue, within and beyond their borders, among Jews and Muslims.  Indeed, tensions and misunderstandings between those groups form a spider’s web that spans the globe. Many anti-Western resentments in the Islamic world stem from a notion that certain powers of the West -- mainly America and secondarily some nations perceived as lackeys of America -- are anti-Arab, anti-Muslim, and entirely tilted toward the concerns of Israelis rather than to the plight of occupied Palestinians.  This sense that the world’s most powerful players are unfair in mediating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict serves as the rocket fuel for the engine of Muslim anger toward Western governments.  In this context, any amount of Western developmental aid or political assistance could only backfire, in that it could be dismissed as more intervention by meddling superpowers.  This anger did not appear to exist a few decades ago, when an Eisenhower or Kissinger was viewed as a less “biased” player by the Arab and Muslim world.  Back then, the Muslim world felt greater envy and less resentment toward America; today the ratio has reversed. A central irony is that the success of pro-Israeli commentators in shaping American foreign-policy discourse may be counterproductive to the long-term hopes of those supporters.  The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart lampooned the matter here.  As he joked last summer about American presidential candidates’ unwillingness to critique the policy of America’s main friend in the Middle East:  “Oh, I forgot – you can’t say anything remotely critical of Israel and still get elected president.  Which is funny, because you know where you can criticize Israel?  Uh... Israel.” Stewart says out loud, as a Jewish-American, what many Muslims around the world are whining about, especially as they watch an Obama seem to morph himself to convince voters that he’s not as sympathetic to Palestinians as he may seem.  The irony is that Muslims – educated and less educated alike – find themselves repeating the dangerous and misguided mantra, “See, the Jews really do run the world.”  (Bernard Lewis, often considered a critic of the modern Muslim world, makes a fascinating point in noting that modern anti-Semitism among Muslims was imported from a Europe that itself needed centuries to dispose of it. Many in the West would be fascinated to see how the seemingly most inflammatory statements from the Muslim world involve an awestruck sense of jealousy about how the Jewish community can influence Western thinking so much better than Arabs can.) The solution involves candor and listening, to a greater degree than what ideologues in various camps can currently tolerate. Muslims on the whole are woefully uneducated about how hard it has been for Jews, even in…... FULL TEXT
 
Read Comments (0) | Add Your Own

Read Comments:

No comments for this entry.

Add a Comment:

Your Name:
Your Email:
Comment:
Please enter the word you see in the image below:

NOTE: Comments are moderated by CPD and will typically be posted if they are relevant and respectful.