Understanding Our Hypocrisy

One major theme of Harper Lee's classic "To Kill A Mockingbird" is that you never truly understand people until you walk in their shoes and view the world from their perspective. To understand Middle Eastern attitudes, we must not only understand their point of view but also understand our own hypocrisy. For instance, we condemn Iran for wanting nuclear power and ignore the fact that Israel has hundreds of nuclear weapons, never has allowed international inspections, and jails its citizens who divulge these secrets. Also, when the UN resolved that Syria should end its occupation of Lebanon, (which came about in order to end a civil war whose underlying cause was Israel's expansionism), Syria promptly withdrew. Contrast Israel, whose occupation of Palestine, parts of Syria and Lebanon, has persisted despite UN resolutions calling for withdrawal, cessation of illegal colonization, etc. When Israel attacks those in the occupied territories, we say Israel has a right to "defend itself," yet we say that Iran, Syria, and Palestine must not support freedom fighters who resist occupation. We support the occupier but not the occupied. The Muslim world understands our hypocrisy but we do not. It is no wonder that Iran has kept its nuclear program secret: more that 20 years ago, Israel preemptively destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor. Many nations in the world now have nuclear power and are of no concern to us. If we had an even-handed Middle East policy and strongly supported the Arab League peace initiative, Iran's nuclear power would be of no concern, because there would be two nations, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in peace.

The Cartoons

The world's 1.3 billion Muslims have many legitimate grievances: foreign troops occupy Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan; even as citizens, Muslims are discriminated against in Europe with regard to employment, etc.; their culture and religion are regularly subjected to insults. Writing in the San Antonio Express -News, November 19, 2004, Mansour O. El-Kikhia described the media spin with regard to the death of Yasser Arafat. In the eyes of his people, Arafat was revered and loved as the father of his country. El-Kikhia's op-ed is entitled "Arafat was correct to snub Barak deal," and El-Kikhia explains why. Yet many in the US media "displayed great exuberance" at Arafat's demise and hurled insults at Arafat and the Palestinians. "It is strange that supporters of Israel in the U.S. media give themselves the right to demean my race, culture, and faith. There is a limit to how much one can endure of such diatribes," El-Kikhia writes. "Had I or any other writer called Israelis just one of the derogatory terms used to describe Arafat, Palestinians or Muslims, my editor's phone would not stop ringing." And it is true. There is a terrible double standard. When one hears the inflammatory comments against Muslims made on radio talk shows, one gets the impression that there are many who are hoping for a "clash of civilizations." The publication of the anti-Mohammed cartoons is further evidence of this.