Symposium explores postwar Middle Eastern perspectives

To address heightened interest in postwar Iraq and other Arab
countries, the Center for Near Eastern Studies held a symposium
Thursday titled, “The Consequences of the Iraq War for
Democracy, Terrorism and Peace.”

The main speakers at the four-hour-long event were Professor
Shibley Telhami ““ Anwar Sadat Professor of Peace at
University of Maryland ““ and Graham Fuller who once worked
with the CIA and is currently working for the RAND Corporation.

Various professors, including UCLA’s Nikki Keddie of the
history department and Hassan Husain of Islamic studies,
participated as respondents.

The symposium kicked off with the results of a 2002 public
opinion survey Telhami conducted across six Middle Eastern
countries. The results showed that 90 percent of people surveyed
opposed the war in Iraq, and that 97 percent believed that the
United States’ reason for attack was oil.

The audience seemed to find the numbers higher than expected,
indicated by a stir in the room when Telhami announced his
findings.

“Intensity of opposition toward the United States in the
Arab world is much higher than elsewhere,” Telhami said about
the general attitudes of the Middle East toward the United States
in explanation of the figures.

Telhami’s various public opinion surveys ““ which he
began conducting in the 1970s ““ showed that the Middle
East’s approval of the United States’ actions was at
the lowest “we had ever seen since the public opinion surveys
were (first) done.”

One of two possible explanations for such low approval of the
United States is that most of the Middle East believes that the
United States holds a double standard security policy by deeming
Iraq to be a threat while disregarding North Korea, he said. The
second possibility is that they believe the United States is out to
target the Islamic religion.

In the eyes of the majority of the Middle East, the United
States is attempting to weaken the foundations of Islam by
attacking Iraq for oil and supporting Israel rather than fighting
for democracy and democratic development, Telhami explained.

“There is a tremendous pessimism about the outcome of
war,” said Telhami. According to his studies, Telhami found
that most of the Middle East predicted increased terrorism and a
halted movement toward democracy.

Telhami believes that a fundamental ideological difference
concerning terrorism in America and the Middle East is responsible
for different expectations on the outcome of war.

While military leaders in Washington expect terrorism to decline
because they believe terrorism is a state-supported activity, many
Middle Easterners believe it is a private activity free of state
involvement.

Graham Fuller gave a wider view of current and future
geopolitical relations in the Middle East. Now, many non-democratic
countries want a bipolar world that could check U.S. power. The
United States is “still the single greatest power that will
determine future landscape of Iraq and the policies it will
adopt,” he said.

“If the United States continues to approach a unilateral
policy focused on security issues … we will undoubtedly see
makings of a strong anti-U.S. bloc,” argued Fuller. How
intense the anti-U.S. sentiment would be, or who would comprise of
this bloc is still questionable, Fuller said.

But, he said, the United States’ ability to intervene in
Middle East politics does not necessarily signal an end to the
Islamic regime.

“I still see no alternative to political Islam in regimes
of the Middle East. I have no reason to believe that … Iraq will
no longer lead the Arab world,” Fuller said.

A rivalry for leadership in the Shi’a world after the
removal of Hussein’s regime that oppressed the Shi’a.
Fuller predicted that the Shi’as in Iraq and Iran may compete
for Lebanon’s support.

Fuller briefly discussed the impact of war on Iraq’s
closest neighbors: Turkey and Iran. Turkey “has lost more
than it has gained from the overthrow of Hussein’s
regime” by refusing to side with the Americans in attacking
Iraq, he said. Iran was possibly the “biggest loser of
all,” Fuller said, since it was Iraq’s biggest
supporter in fighting the war.

Each of the four respondents took 15 minutes at the podium to
present their own views of post-war Iraq and the Arab world as well
as to respond to Telhami and Fuller’s speeches.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *