We are setting the right example

Ali al-Ahmed's opinion piece appears in the Wall Street Journal earlier today. He refutes the notion that Muslim sentiment is being abused by American culture.

As a Muslim, I am able to purchase copies of the Quran in any bookstore in any American city, and study its contents in countless American universities. American museums spend millions to exhibit and celebrate Muslim arts and heritage. On the other hand, my Christian and other non-Muslim brothers and sisters in Saudi Arabia -- where I come from -- are not even allowed to own a copy of their holy books.

The Bible in Saudi Arabia may get a person killed, arrested, or deported. In September 1993, Sadeq Mallallah, 23, was beheaded in Qateef on a charge of apostasy for owning a Bible.

He then goes on to critique the conduct and attitudes of his own countrymen and coreligionists.

As Muslims, we have not been as generous as our Christian and Jewish counterparts in respecting others' holy books and religious symbols.

In Saudi school curricula, Jews and Christians are considered deviants and eternal enemies. ... Meanwhile Christianity and Judaism, both indigenous to the Middle East, are maligned through systematic hostility by Middle Eastern governments and their religious apparatuses.

Finally he offers some of the best advice possible.

The lesson here is simple: If Muslims wish other religions to respect their beliefs and their Holy book, they should lead by example.

This revolution in Middle Eastern thinking is fueled by our intervention in the region. Can you imagine the complete disaster had we chosen to pull out of the region when things got messy? Had we managed to dump the 'quagmire' on the United Nations we could very well have suffered a tremendous economic collapse along with a series of additional terrorist strikes and attempts against our territory.

Comments

[Axel]

Stuart, why do you say that "This revolution in Middle Eastern thinking is fueled by our intervention in the region."? I don't see any proof to that claim (Bush propaganda aside).

Al-Ahmed is living in the US, so he's very much influenced from his daily life there. Without being able to cross-check this, I believe he is quite removed from the daily life in the Middle East.

As an advocate of cultural relativity, who are we (or rather: the US, or, even more specific: who is GWB) to assume that our way of living is better than someone else's? Why do you assume that the people in the Middle East want the personal liberty to buy Bibles or to elect their leaders like the West does? I've never understood the need to impose our moral and ethical and political values on other peoples (pure hunger for power aside).

[Stuart Berman]

I won't try to prove the statement but I will offer some evidence:

1) Moammar Ghaddfi changed his policies in response to US intervention in the Middle East (according to his own statements)
2) Syria hastily retreated from Lebanon and many including Lebanese are crediting the US
3) Egyptians are emboldened to press for political reform
4) More Iraqis are realizing that the US is not in Iraq for the sake of stealing their oil - but that we desire their success and prosperity
5) Iraqis are now experiencing freedom of speech and liberty
6) Opinions of Muslims and Arabs living in or from the region:
Fouad Ajami, Ali al-Ahmed, Khaleel Mohammed, local blogs http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/ http://www.bigpharaoh.blogspot.com/ http://regimechangeiran.blogspot.com/ http://fromcairo.blogspot.com/
(Sure there are many counter opinions but my whole point is that the debate has recently started in earnest - I am an admirer of Ajami who has long criticized the Arab world for living the life of victimhood and never seriously debating the underlying issues.)

Re: cultural relativity
This is why I really like al-Ahmed's whole piece, (since he grew up in Saudi Arabia) he is able to speak from within that culture - I am not necessarily imposing mine upon them.
However I am not of the opinion that we have neither the right nor the responsibility to concern ourselves with other peoples and cultures. We have healthy debate about when and to what degree we should intervene and our decisions are not necessarily right. As examples, should we have been involved in the attempt to prevent the genocide attempt in Bosnia of Muslims by Christians? Should we have taken any stance against systematic torture of women, children and men in Iraq because that is their way of living and some people preferred that system? Must there be a majority opinion to justify our involvement? Zarkawi asserts that Islam does not allow freedom of religion. Who is he to force his brutality upon the world? He is responsible for sawing our people's heads off... he gave us the right to respond.

I don't have a problem with people making choices I don't agree with or understand. Eastern culture typically places the society above the individual - I am not trying to change that but I believe that our ways of personal freedom and choice succeed due to human nature. There are universal values including justice that transcend culture. I can't find any reason to disagree with al-Ahmed's conclusion, if you want respect then lead by example.

[Axel]

I wish I could agree. However, evidence and experience suggests that a) meddling in foreign affairs with the only supporting factor a strong military does not work in the long run and b) there is no such thing as philanthropy on such a scale (especially when politics come into play). Granted, Bush seems simple-minded enough to pursue the goal of a free Middle East for this reason, but his... government... has its own objectives.
I know this sounds very cynical (and it probably is), but I've seen too much by now to believe there's no hidden agenda and that any given politician is doing something not related to keeping or extending their power.

[Stuart Berman]

I strongly agree with you on point 'a' but I believe that there is much more than only a strong military factor, I believe there is a strong popular support in these regions. I had an Iraqi computer science professor that would discuss his opinions after class with a group of us, I have heard numerous personal testimonies that had convinced me that peoples were being oppressed and they looked to us for help.

I also agree generally on point 'b' we often act out of self interest but this self interest is not callous and without compassion. I believe that the United States and those that believe in our principles act in a way that respects justice and fairness. We carry in our hearts the belief that all men (people) are created equal and a higher authority establishes our rights. Unlike plenty of societies we are not given our freedoms by the government but we give the government its authority. When someone criticizes the US they are actually criticizing the people since we gave the government authority and we can and do rescind that authority. I accept responsibility for our government even when I disagree with its policies. Some societies consider their leaders to be divinely ordained, whereas we do not (although this claim is used as an attempt to discredit an opponent at times) and as such we limit their powers and are wary of any attempt to broaden those powers without good cause. (This is a typical Left vs Right argument - the Left seeks to broaden powers favoring an elite over the populace - while the Right mistrusts men and government seeking to retain individual rights - the Left continues to lose support nationally.) Left or Right, Americans broadly believe in our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and fundamentally believe that all people around the globe have this right as well. (Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville described this beautifully in 1835 in his book Democracy in America.) We may disagree with other cultures but we generally still respect them. One of our greatest strengths is the diversity within our nation each person has a voice (thanks in no small part to the Dutch influence in the 17th Century) and it shapes our collective conscience. Our history has shown that our nation tends to ultimately rise above the personal interests of its officials and many are concerned that we keep it this way.