America and Political Islam: Clash of Cultures or Clash of Interests? [Paperback]

Fawaz A. Gerges (Author)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0521639573 | ISBN-13: 978-0521639576 | Publication Date: May 28, 1999 | Edition: First Edition

This book provides a comprehensive account of the origins of American policy on political Islam, chronicling the policy debates on Islamism in the United States over the course of time. The author then delves deeper into the US political scene to analyze the historical, political, cultural, and security issues that might help explain America's preoccupation with Islam and Muslims. The book also addresses the clash of civilizations debate and assesses the relative importance of culture and values in the words and deeds of US officials on political Islam.

Editorial Reviews

Review

"This book is the product of many years of research and reflection on the relations between the West and the Islamic world. It deals with a subject that is not just topical but really important. Fawaz Gerges is uniquely well qualified to write about this subject. He combines deep insight into Middle East politics with a subtle and sophisticated analysis of US policy towards political Islam. His book should be of great interest to students, policymakers, and general readers." Avi Shlaim, St. Antony's College

"Gerges' level-headed analysis superbly reveals the discrepancies between American words and American deeds. Though one might despair of our country ever having a coherent Middle East policy, dispassionate and thorough insight like this could be the beginning of wisdom." Richard Bulliet, Columbia University

"Fawaz Gerges has made a significant contribution to our understanding of U.S. policy toward the Islamic political currents sweeping across the Middle East. One of the many outstanding features of this book is its balanced and remarkably well-informed account of American policymakers at work, torn between democratic idealism and pragmatic security concerns, struggling to comprehend a complex ideological force which they find threatening yet which they dimly realize requires some kind of inclusion in the authoritarian politics of Middle Eastern regimes friendly to Washington. I found his treatment of the Carter, Reagan, Bush and Clinton policies to be both fair-minded and critical. His policy recommendations are cogent and deserve serious attention. This book is a valuable addition to the literature on American foreign policy in general and our Middle East policy in particular." Michael C. Hudson, Georgetown University

"Fawaz Gerges has written a major critical evaluation of American policy towards the Muslim world that will serve to define public debates on the subject. Based on a meticulous reading of official documents and statements and supplemented with interviews of key decision-makers, he provides a guide at once thought-provoking and instructive to both American rhetoric and policy. Drawing on a deep knowledge of events in the Islamic world as well as insights into the foreign policy making process, Gerges documents the continuities and discontinuities that have marked the US response to a politically mobilised Islam. In the process, he sounds a salutary cautionary note about the dangers of assuming, even implicitly, that 'Islam' constitutes a radical challenge to American interests." James Piscatori, Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies

"Gerges presents the first full-length account of perhaps the most ideological and exciting foreign policy debate of our time--how the US should respond to Islamism. He does so in a clear and well-informed way...Recommended for upper-division undergraduates and above." Choice

Book Description

This book provides a comprehensive account of the origins of American policy on political Islam, chronicling the policy debates on Islamism in the United States over the course of time. The author then delves deeper into the US political scene to analyze the historical, political, cultural, and security issues that might help explain America's preoccupation with Islam and Muslims. The book also addresses the clash of civilizations debate and assesses the relative importance of culture and values in the words and deeds of US officials on political Islam.

Product Details

• Paperback: 296 pages
• Publisher: Cambridge University Press; First Edition edition (May 28, 1999)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0521639573
• ISBN-13: 978-0521639576
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 14.9 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.6 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,106,114 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Fawaz A. Gerges, the Director of the Middle East Centre at the London School of Economics, is Professor of Middle Eastern Politics and International Relations. His books include Journey of the Jihadist and The Far Enemy: Why Jihad Went Global. (Photo Credit: Jane Hoffer)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

27 of 31 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars US Policies Explained, Solid Suggestions given., November 25, 2001

By 

GregRobin Smith "G.Robin Smith" (Everett, WA USA (near Seattle)) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: America and Political Islam: Clash of Cultures or Clash of Interests? (Paperback)

Overall Reaction:
Simply put, this is the most lucid work on the political Middle East and "the way it is, how it got there, and what to do about it" that I have seen. I understood everything Mr. Gerges had to say and could not help but be persuaded by his understated style and crystalline presentation. Written with respect for his reader (he never speaks patronizingly) he so clearly elucidates his points with well presented examples that the book becomes not only a compelling written account of his thought, but an excellent reference work. One does not need to absorb the whole book in order to arrive at valuable insight, although a thorough reading is recommended. In addition to the many keen observations he makes, he gives suggestions, clear, concrete suggestions, as to what to do with the problems outlined. I find this refreshing. Many books I have read recently project a good deal of frustration (although probably deserved) while others focus on what has gone wrong or been done wrong. Mr. Gerges collects his points of reference, tells us their histories and creates a map as to where things can be taken and put into order. Mr. Gerges presents his compelling reasoning along with a great deal of information (both in the text and in his extensive footnoting) all captured in a clear, calm approach.

How I will use this book in my further studies:
It is useful as a reference book as specific issues can easily be extracted for argument. I intend on both referring to this work in my writing with politicians and to keep up on Mr. Gerges's work to see what new insights he provides.

The book's main points:
We (the polled majority of the US at least since the Iranian Revolution in 1981) still hold the Arab Muslim in a negative stereotype as violent and Islam as a "hostile culture". He demonstrates that the US has never had a consistent policy, show of policy, thought process or self-knowledge of the Middle East. The west keeps reacting as if it were dealing with a (possibly) trained lion, in awe of its beauty, happy it has not jumped on us yet, and holding a gun at the ready in case it does. The west has never welcomed the Mid-East as a full member of modern society, it seems. As to our prejudices, he rightly points out the undeserved knee jerk reaction after the Oklahoma City bombing where numerous attacks on "Mid Easterners" were reported immediately after that bombing.
US Officials deny there is tie between media presentation, news and US Policy. I think there is ample evidence available that pretty well challenges that assumption especially when you look at the cumulative effect of media-news as well as media-entertainment on popular assumptions. Gary Sick's given quote: "We are all prisoners of our own cultural assumptions " is particularly to the point here, but it begs the question, "If we are prisoners, who is holding the key that will free us from mis-information?"
The book was written before the current situations, but his assessment of how we formerly backed the leaders we are now bombing when they were fighting the Soviet Union, and many other such observations, is still enlightening and relevant.
The Middle East, oddly, seems to be the Swamp of Politics. Wherever we step, there are bogs and tangled roots and mire and muck. If so, it is a swamp we have helped create. We have seemingly never dealt honestly with the Mid East and so we keep finding ourselves caught up in a matted tangle of former policies and legacies. We have been ambiguous at best and harmful (kindly put) to the development of good ongoing relations between the west and Middle East. It is as if we do not expect them to notice that we do not like or trust them very much, except for their oil. One of our ambassadors even said, "Islam is a conquering religion threatening the American way of life " although that Ambassador did stress that most US policy makers did not share his view.
The west views the Middle East as backward. The west cannot seem to get its head around the reality of a clerically dominated regime. We do handle the idea of the Pope, though. Maybe this is because the army of His Eminence is small.
Mr. Gerges points out the continual duplicity of governments: What they create, what they portray and what they are willing to do to keep the truth of one from another is the unfortunate, resource-consuming, status quo. It seems that one of the most pervasive issues the western world must learn to deal with is its confusion over how a people can live with a different cultural base of reference then the western model.

His brilliant step-by-step analysis of the unique histories of many of the Middle Eastern nations and their potentials (for benefice and for ill) is particularly well laid out. The Middle East is a region, but also a collection of countries. He gives us good access points into the machinery of the way things are so we can at least have the option and chance to do what we can for the best interest of all involved.

It is my conclusion that the oft-used political phrase of "clash of cultures" is not accurate. However, because of this book, I see it as much more of a clash of wills and belief in the right of one way to exist over, as opposed to along side of, others. Differing cultures can co-exist, but the will to be dominant, to have one's "ways" proved correct is what cannot be sustained. This book by Fawaz A. Gerges is at least an offered tool to help correct and improve the situation.

GregRobin Smith
RedHorse & Ridire Reviews
[e-mail]
Please write me if you wish the whole review (including page # references)

9 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Needed context for understanding U.S. Islam policy., March 24, 2003

By 

C. Kollars (Ipswich, Massachusetts USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: America and Political Islam: Clash of Cultures or Clash of Interests? (Paperback)

Although published in 1999 toward the end of the Clinton presidency, America and Political Islam sheds a lot of light on the attack on the twin towers in 2001. Focussing on U.S. foreign policy toward various aspects of the Islamic resurgence and how it has changed both through time and in different places puts recent events into a broader context that is sorely missing from many analyses. The book's investigation begins with the Iranian Revolution and covers four presidencies: Carter, Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton.

It tackles head on the climate after the end of the Cold War, noting that an over-easy replacement of the "red menace" of Communism with the "green menace" of Islam explains surprisingly much. It also tackles the tendency to conflate the "Iran problem" with the "Islam problem" which has often led to inappropriate responses to current situations.

The largest contribution the book makes is in sketching out how much U.S. foreign policy is constrained by Congress and public opinion. Our presidential administrations would probably have made much more nuanced, relevant, and accomodationist responses to various situations related to Islam if they had not been cornered by powerful congressmen with simplistic black and white views of the world. A secondary contribution is pointing out the very many places where the U.S. in dealing with Islam says one thing but does something different.

4.0 out of 5 stars Important, but very very dry, March 6, 2009

By 

WiltDurkey (Vancouver, BC Canada) - See all my reviews

This review is from: America and Political Islam: Clash of Cultures or Clash of Interests? (Paperback)

This book analyzes how America reacts to Islamic political parties. It is an interesting book, but not without some slight shortcomings.

- The title is misleading. This is not a book about political Islam at all. Only a book about how the US interacts with Islamic political parties and movements. The difference? Going in the other direction, the motivation of Muslims in interacting with the US are not covered much at all.

- There isn't much critical analysis of what Islam might have done to provoke US hostility. For example, only one paragraph mentions in that, yes, female US voters may very well resent the perceived treatment of women.

- Very little coverage of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Granted, Pakistan and Afghanistan became subjects of interest after 9/11, but the US tacit acceptance of Saudi Arabia's seriously messed up government should have been included. Neither is there much coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflicts and its impact on US policy.

- This is a very dry, academic book. Not much in there is going to be really news to the informed layman, but it does review the facts and interpret them. On the other hand, if you aren't familiar with Middle East affairs already, this book will not hold your hand much.

- The author often theorizes that, if only Muslims achieved material wealth, the religious intolerance displayed by some would magically disappear and they would all become tolerant. That is certainly possible, but unproven. The US is quite wealthy, yet the hardcore Christian ideology displayed by some of its citizens makes non-American Westerners quite uneasy. Religious tolerance and wealth go well together, but do not have to co-exist.

OK, for the good points:

- Dispassionately analyzes both the official statements of the US government and the actual acts by the government. Basically, the US, pre-2001, is caught between 2 urges. First a certain sympathy for disenfranchised Middle Easterners and a desire to avoid needlessly antagonizing Muslims. Second, an instinctive distrust of popular movement that might topple its allies. The closer the ally, the more the US will back repressive governments. This being illustrated by the case study of Egypt (which is a close ally w.o oil) vs. Algeria (a remote concern, even with its oil reserves).

- As it is written before 9/11, it gives a sense of what was going before our current troubles and the book is much more neutral than what has followed.

- A good reminder that prudent US administrations might be more accommodating towards non-violent Islamic parties, even at the cost of taking a harder line towards its allies. Basically, unconditionally propping up unpopular governments can blow up in your face - witness Iran. And the world really does need successful, tolerant Muslim countries with governments who care about their citizens.

- Turkey is used as a reminder that moderate Islam is not an oxymoron. Turkey is not without its human rights flaws, but Muslim parties have not initiated past Turkish repressions.

- Iran is also taken as a test study and the lack of useful US engagement with that country is much deplored. Yet, the author fails to note that the Iran was in flagrant violation of civilized behavior between nation states over centuries when it came to not respecting diplomatic immunity. Normally, the first step towards normalization is opening embassies. So how does one deal with a country with Iran's recent history? For all that, US policy seems unproductive, well on par with its relations with Cuba.