 |
Petra Marquardt-Bigman is a German/Israel citizen with a Ph.D. in contemporary history with a focus on European public opinion relating to the Middle East, Islamic Terrorism, the US and Israel.
|
|
|
|
By Petra Marquardt-Bigman
October 1, 2006
What if an Israeli prime minister called for Iran to be wiped off the map? And if we are already into imagining things, let's imagine for a moment that this prime minister was not Ehud Olmert, but Ariel Sharon, and let's also imagine that there would be a conference in Herzliya entitled: "The World without Jihadism". Maybe there should also be some cartoon contest, it doesn't have to be about genocide, it could perhaps just highlight the funny side of the slaughter of Muslims by the crusaders. What would be the reaction of the world? What would be the reaction at the UN, in the European media, in the streets of Berlin, Paris, and London?
Would the UN politely welcome this Israeli prime minister to give a speech at the opening of the General Assembly? Would the Council on Foreign Relations invite him to discuss his ideas for peace and justice in the Middle East? Would a respected Washington Post journalist like Bob Woodward quote those parts of the prime minister's speech that question the US administration's policies in the Middle East?
What-if-questions like these could fill a book, and they are not necessarily a futile exercise that yields no clues about what is going on in the real world. Of course, in the real world, there is no way that Israel would want to behave like this; and the point of the what-if-questions here is definitely not to demand that any state that calls for the elimination of another state should be treated with as much indulgence as Iran, or to demand that Iran should be treated with as little indulgence as Israel would be.
The point is simply to realize that the real world we live in has come to take double standards for granted; indeed, double standards have arguably become the single most important mechanism that the Western world uses in dealing with the Islamic world.
If the leader of an Islamic state that is single-mindedly pursuing nuclear capabilities calls for wiping off another state from the map, it's distasteful and gross, but it's not as offensive and threatening and serious as a similar call issued by a leader of a Western-style democracy. If leading Muslim preachers call regularly for the killing of "infidels" and denounce Christians and Jews as monkeys, donkeys, and pigs in Arabic, it's simply not as offensive as it is when the Pope quotes a Byzantine emperor's criticism of Islam in German. If poll results show that fully two thirds of Palestinians approve of Hamas' refusal to recognize Israel, it just goes to show that the poor Palestinians have been radicalized by the Israeli occupation, and that therefore they should not be held responsible for the intransigence of the Hamas government they elected. By contrast, Israelis should obviously be held responsible for the fact that all the peace initiatives that were pursued by various Israeli governments came to nothing, and therefore the countless calls for boycotts of Israeli academia, films, exhibits, companies and products are fully justified, as are the calls to try Israeli military personnel and politicians as war criminals.
That Israel is held to different standards than the rest of the Middle East is the price the country pays for being regarded as a Western society. But there is also a price that the West pays for its willingness to employ double standards. Far from demonstrating tolerance and respect for cultural differences, these double standards are a reflection of a deep despise that patronizes the peoples of the Middle East as too immature, too underdeveloped and too deprived to be responsible for their attitudes.
Ahmadinejad may say that he wants Israel to be wiped off the map, he may proceed to explain eloquently and knowledgably why he regards the establishment of the state of Israel as a historic injustice and why, in his view, Israel has no right to exist, and Western media and politicians will still ponder what the man really tries to say. Meticulous surveys may show ever so unequivocally that clear majorities of Muslim populations share his views, and Western media and politicians will have no problem to ignore that and assert that the vast majority of moderates in the Middle East desperately longs for a peaceful accommodation with Israel. The best known Egyptian democracy movement may go to the trouble to organize a campaign to collect one million signatures to annul the country's peace with Israel, and their efforts will simply be dismissed as an emotional response to the Lebanon war.
No wonder that the Islamic world feels humiliated?But cynicism aside, what are the options for dealing with the very real, deep-seated and wide-spread desire in the Islamic world to undo the establishment of the state of Israel? Obviously, the first step would be to acknowledge this desire. Instead of doing that, the West is almost imperceptibly starting to share it. Fellows at respected European institutes can write articles arguing that Israel is a failed state and should be abolished, or they can issue a playful call to "Give Iranian Nukes a Chance" without wasting a thought about the repercussions for Israel -- none of this will damage an illustrious career as a European intellectual.
The double standards so dear to Western elites have resulted in the intellectual dishonesty that fully subscribes to the view that Israel is at the root of the Middle East problem, which in turn is the main reason for Islamic extremism. The solution is as simplistic as the analysis: Get rid of Israel, and the problems of the world will be solved. Bringing up historic parallels in this context is taboo, because it is simply not regarded as helpful among intellectual trendsetters.
But historical parallels are nonetheless pertinent: The Islamic world's problems are caused by Israel as little as Germany's problems in the 1920s and 1930s were caused by European Jewry. Even the most cursory review of relevant UNDP data will reveal that Islamic societies suffer from a broad stagnation that leaves most of them lagging behind the developed world and the emerging economies of the Far East in almost every measure of economic and human development. Repressive social structures that condemn half the population to an inferior status and leave little leeway for hundreds of millions of teenagers to be teenagers combine to create a frustration and rage that is hard to imagine over a glass of French wine or German beer in the trendy smoke-filled venues that tolerant European intellectuals like to frequent.
Israel has served Muslim rulers for decades as a convenient conduit to channel the pent-up frustrations of their seething populations. But frustration has turned into a rage that can no longer be satisfied by just destroying Israel. Now the sights are set on the West. Western intellectuals may not like to call it a clash of civilizations, but it surely looks like a clash between reason and rage -- and so far, reason is in retreat.
Views expressed by the author do not
necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.
 
|
|
|
|
Click on the blue headline to read a Talkback comment and respond to it. Click on the  icon to send a private email to the talkback writer. The icon appears only if the writer has decided to be contacted. If no popup window appears, please make sure your popup blocker allows israelinsider.com.
|
|
| |
|
|
