Fathom Logo

Learning PlanSessionsContributors
 The Middle East and the West: Misunderstandings and Stereotypes
 Katerina Dalacoura
Sessions
Session 1
Session 2

East and West: Prejudices and Stereotypes

The impact of 11 September on the relationship between the West and the Middle East has for the most part been negative, but positive developments may also arise from the crisis in the long run. The present brief analysis is an attempt to explore this relationship and shed some light on its implications for world affairs.

Suspicion of the unknown
Ground Zero
FEMA
Ground zero: the remains of the world trade centre following the September 11 attacks. These attacks deeply affected East-West relations.
11 September hardened prejudices and encouraged stereotyping on both the Western and Middle Eastern sides. In the Middle East the West has typically been perceived as an imperial and often arrogant master at the political, economic and the cultural levels. The culture of conspiracy theories that permeates Middle Eastern politics commonly describes the West as the instigator of plots and the invisible 'mover' of events. The history of colonial domination in the nineteenth century, followed by mandate semi-colonialism in the interwar period, left deep suspicion towards European powers, especially Britain and France. The Cold War confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union, which was played out to some extent in the Middle East, meant that ulterior motives were imputed to the actions and alliances of the superpowers in the region. US interest in the survival of Israel and in the constant flow of oil at low prices also meant that the US was seen as a self-interested actor in all its activities in the region. Since the end of the Cold War, the emergence of pax Americana has led to an exaggerated view of the degree to which the US can dominate the region and produce desired outcomes. This is deeply resented by local people, especially the Arabs and Persians, and has contributed to the explosion of Islamist politics in the region over the last twenty-odd years.

relationship, in turn, is also characterised by suspiciousness and misgivings towards the Middle East. There are those who argue that the Middle East has always been laden with a sense of threat for European societies, a sense that developed with the Ottoman incursions into European space and was strengthened by the centuries-long conflict between Christianity and Islam. There has also been an element of the 'mysterious' and the 'unknown' in Western conceptions of the 'Orient' that developed in the nineteenth century as Europeans explored and colonised the Middle Eastern region. But it is difficult to ascertain the extent to which such lingering notions shape the current perspective on the Middle East in Western societies. More directly relevant is the impact of political events over recent decades. The shock of the oil price rises of the 1970s that rocked the world economy is combined, in Western consciousness, with images of violence and terrorism--hijackings, hostage-taking, bombings--emanating from the region. Such violence gradually changed in form from nationalist to religious, the latter having a symbolic start with the Iranian Revolution of 1979. The World Trade Centre attack in New York in 1993, the terrorist attacks in France in 1995 and the massive explosions detonated against the US embassies in Nairobi in Kenya and Dar-es-Salaam in Tanzania in 1998 were all attributed to Islamist extremists, with the latter specifically attributed to Osama bin Laden.

The impact of 11 September
11 September accentuated the negative aspects of the Western-Middle Eastern relationship on both sides. Despite the insistence on the part of Western governments that they have no quarrel with Islam as such, but rather with the extremist exponents of it, the sense among Western publics that Islam is exceptional in its anti-Western animus increased. The 11 September attacks caused the United States to spring into action, hence the campaign in Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban protectors of bin Laden and uproot Al Qaeda. This in turn hardened the sense on the part of many Middle Easterners that the West has a specifically anti-Muslim agenda. This sense of victimisation grew because the post-11 September crisis coincided with the upsurge in the violence of the second Palestinian intifada and the Israeli response to it. The cycle of violence led to desperation about the continuing failure of Western states to apply pressure on Israel to end the occupation. It will increase even more over the next few months if the US attacks Iraq to overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Thinking Points
  • Do you think that the image the Middle East and the West have had of each other has any justification or basis in reality?
  • How would you modify the respective stereotypes?
The 11 September crisis galvanised the West and specifically the US into a 'War against Terrorism'. But the war is being pursued on the basis of a dangerous simplification. This essentially consists of the inclusion of different sorts of phenomena under the single label 'terrorism'. Terrorism can be defined as 'the indiscriminate targeting of civilians for a political purpose'. But although we rightly define terrorism by the means it uses (terrorism is a method), we should also take into consideration the causes behind the phenomenon and the aims pursued by it. Such understanding does not excuse or justify terrorism. It simply enhances our ability to deal with it properly. This has not happened in the post-11 September Middle Eastern context. The result is that different sets of phenomena--Al Qaeda activities, Palestinian terrorism in the context of the second intifada, the activities of Hizbullah in Lebanon, and the possible development of weapons of mass destruction by Iraq and Iran--have all been 'thrown together' under one label. What should take the place of such a simplification?



Session 1
Session 2