Customer Reviews

Resurrecting Empire: Western Footprints and America's Perilous Path in the Middle East

5 star:		(14)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Although I disagree with Professor Khalidi on a number of points, I want to make it clear at the outset that this is an excellent book, very well-written and edited, and driven with the sort of restrained passion that makes for a most interesting read. His command of the modern history of the Middle East is admirable and obvious.

But Khalidi is not a disinterested observer by any stretch of the imagination. He has an agenda, that of laying the blame for the backwardness of the Middle East at the doorstep of the West while championing the cause of the Islamic people of the region. He is especially passionate when presenting the case for the Palestinians. His outrage at the historical record of a brutal, exploitive, and hypocritical colonialism (was there any other kind?) by the West, especially Great Britain and France, fairly singes the pages. His disgust at the stupidity, mendacity, and narrow-mindedness of the current Bush administration is palpable.

What Khalidi does not do very well is offer the sort of forward-looking, balanced, and dispassionate critique that would lead to a solution to the trouble in the Middle East. He offers a first step toward a solution to the problem in Iraq, namely that of a multilaterally-guided transition to a sovereign Iraq as opposed to the current bilateralism of the United States and Great Britain. Along the way he points out that it was the Western powers who concocted the artificial Iraqi state in the first place, and it was the Cold War US government that supported Saddam Hussein and helped him to brutalize the Iraqi people. However he does not offer specifics on how a recurrence of a Baathist-like dictatorship, or a civil war, or a Shiite theocracy (or all three in succession) can be avoided after the Western powers leave. Furthermore in the seething chapter on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict he offers no solution at all, merely a call for "real" negotiations toward a solution, with the implication that the solution he has in mind is not for public consumption. The very title of his chapter, "The United States and Palestine" hints at his attitude toward Israel and what his solution might be.

What Khalidi does not see (and in his way is as blind as the neocons in the White House) is that the United States and Israel and others have their interests as well. It is one thing to cite history and its inequities; it is another thing to realize that regardless of the mistakes made in the past, we have the present to deal with, and that any solution in the Middle East will require that the interests of people alive today be acknowledged and taken into consideration. Just as a military "victory" over Saddam Hussein is no solution to the problems the Iraqi people and the region face, neither is any "shut up and go home" solution going to work for the rest of the world. Certainly the US is not going to allow Israel to be overrun, nor are we, rightly or wrongly, going to sit by quietly while an Iran-like theocracy bent on acquiring nuclear weapons and exporting its Islamic rule, mushrooms out of the debris in Iraq. It is not just realpolitik but realism itself that dictates that the world cannot allow an unbridled Islamic radicalism of the sort that exists in Iran, or even worse, of the sort that had taken over Afghanistan, to expand.

Khalidi argues strongly that the US hasn't paid sufficient attention to "the region's political dynamics" or given the "Middle Eastern realities" the seriousness they deserve (p. 165). I think he's right; however the same could be said about his non-awareness of the global realities.

For all his learnedness and his sharply candid expression, unfortunately I see in Khalidi's overall tone and approach the partisan politician more than I see the historian or the political scientist. Typical is this from page 172 (and elsewhere): "Iraqis and others in the Middle East have a strong sense of history." (And other people don't?) This vague and superior sound-byte pronouncement from on high reminds me unhappily of what politicians in the US are fond of doing, that is, telling us what "the American people" think.

Carrying this historical burden (that Khalidi seems to think the Iraqi people are especially saddled with) to an absurdity (still on page 172), he objects to what he sees as "a symbolic contingent of Mongolian soldiers" as part of the US-led coalition in Iraq. He believes their presence may provoke "vividly the history of earlier occupations of Baghdad, such as that in 1258 when it was sacked by the Mongols"! Yes, that's 1258.

Bottom line: partisan, passionate, even prejudicial, but very much worth reading.

When an administration clothes itself in secrecy, oblivious to the history of a region before charging into war, it runs the risk of failure. As Rashid Khalidi carefully explains, this is exactly what is happening in Iraq and the consequences will long be felt. "Resurrecting Empire" is a hard-hitting critique of a White House that has gotten us into a mess with no end in sight. It is a timely book exposing the naivete of leaders with tunnel vision.

The author writes with a serious and often weighty pen; this is not a book to be read in one sitting. Khalidi effectively lays out the history of the region, the strategic importance of oil, the Palestinian/Israeli situation and America's reactions and responses to what has happened in the Middle East prior to the U.S. occupation of Iraq, and what the ramifications may be. I found those chapters about oil and Palestine to be the most fascinating sections of the book. Oil is an issue that the Bush White House doesn't like to talk about too much and the Palestinian question, as the author points out, has become even more of a problem with the administration's tilt toward Israel.

"Resurrecting Empire" is a highly laudable work and is for the serious reader who wants to get to know more about the heart and the history of this volatile region of the world. Had Bush and his cronies made any attempt to learn more of what the Middle East is like, the United States might not be in the rough situation we face in Iraq today.

As an American from Turkey, I am impressed with Prof. Khalidi's depth of understanding of Iraq and Middle East, and, of course, our country's not so successful relationship with Middle East. It is easy to hurl insults by some Americans to all that is not American (see the comments by a reviewer from Chicago below) but we have previously experienced our "imperialistic" tendencies in Vietnam when we're not clear about our reasons for being there. We left after terrible sacrifices and, behold, Vietnam turned out to be a friend down the road. No thanks to us, they are doing fine as an independent country. Prof. Khalidi brings a similar sensitivity to our goals, methods and end games in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East. His approach is refreshing, honest, clear and doable. Bush administration may not like the objective outside voices but most administrations do not. This isn't the time to be pig-headed but to be level-headed and extremely clear. Prof. K. brings that thoughtfulness. Those who'd like to "nuke" any country who doesn't do what we tell it, will not like this book.

The reviews by the standard troupe of Israel apologistas and Judea-Samaria crowd aside, this is a great book for the novice reader of contemporary Middle-East history. It is not exactly an easy read, perhaps due to language barrier issues, but with a little patience, the Westerner who has only been exposed to drivel from mainstream media has a lot to learn from this book.

To those who fault this book, and many like it, for being "one-sided", I have to say, I wonder how you would write a book about a murder or a rape? Validate both sides equally? The obvious point being, there do not exist two equally valid sides to all human conflicts, and to admit to that is the first step to find a workable remedy.

And to the other few who have trashed this book and other works by Khalidi, I have seen from your other reviews that even works by Israeli Zionist foreign ministers (Shlomo Ben Ami) and pro-Israeli historians (Benny Morris) don't please your taste, since any criticism of the State of Israel is tantamount to an unforgivable sin to you. People like Ben Ami and Morris, despite being strongly pro-Israel and unabashed Zionists, have the couraged to admit that many massacres and atrocities were committed by the Yishuv and later Israel. Their justifications may not appeal to the non-Jewish non-Arab outsider (Morris' famous line: "You have to break quite a few eggs to make a good omlette"), but at least they do not try to deny all historic facts. But to some, mere mention of such facts is a deal-breaker. Let the silence go on ...

Khalidi cuts through the pretense and rhetoric of mid-east politics to deconstruct the xenophobic and misguided U.S. policy decisions which laid the destructive ground work toward a perpetual state of perceived unrest. The unrest, of course, being those instances that events do not favor U.S. economic and political gains. This is a facinating and insightful treatise which should be required reading for the President, and every Senator, Congressman, and cabinet member.

Rashid Khalidi warned in his latest book of the transformation of the United States into an empire, following in the footsteps of former Western empires whose fate was colonial failure after a bitter and failing confrontation with the colonies'natives.
Published in 2004 slightly after the American liberation of Baghdad, Khalidi's book, Empire, can be divided into five main parts. The first part criticizes the American war on Iraq saying that it was uncalled for and waged by people driven by their personal interests more than their claims of defending
America against the danger of terrorism. In the second part, Khalidi highlighted the failure of British and France to colonize most of the Arab world saying that behind this failure, there was popular determination to win independence.
In this part, historian Khalidi committed a lot of anachronisms. He failed to put what he termed the national struggle in its greater regional and international context. Was the Palestinian revolution against the British out of national motives or was it instigated by the growing power of the axis countries that were trying to win back colonies they had lost to
Britain and France in WWI?
Khalidi's emotional description of what he sees as struggle for national sovereignty is perhaps the only drawback in his book. Khalidi then moves to describe the growth of relations between the United States and the Arab world ever since the 1919 post WWI Versailles Conference delegated what came to be known as the King-Crane Commission to learn about the Arab peoplesŐ whishes.
The committee astoundingly founded that Arabs thought, if mandate was their only option, they would go for American mandate. The Arab perspective of America changed drastically, however, especially with the growing interest of American oil firms in the region.
The anti-American Arab sentiment grew even further with America heavily interfering in favor of the Israelis in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
According to Khalidi, the United States failed to deliver all the promises that it would pressure Israel to stop its aggressive policy of settlement of Palestinian land during Palestinian-Israeli peace negotiations.
Khalidi also fell heavily on late Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat accusing him of sabotaging the peace process in favor of his personal interests and the interests of his corrupt entourage.

Khalidi, the respected Palestinian historian, has delivered a penetrating account of the aggressive nature of colonialism in the Middle East. He deftly recounts the histories of Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Palestine/Israel, Iran and Saudi Arabia. He states that many of these countries were on a trajectory that included a parlimentary electorial system, until Britain and France had taken possession of them following the Turkish losses in WW1.

Khalidi presents the reader with stunning accounts of how Britain and France also had to fight insurgencies in places like Amman and Damascus. Both had levelled capital cities through arial bombings, indiscriminately killing thousands of civilians. Wait, this sounds familiar. Falluja? The book presents a historical reality that mirrors the present.

While the books historical sections are informative and readable, the present analysis is bogged down with rhetoric. His thesis conflates the past with present: when foreign powers attempt to control the destiny of peoples in attempt to control their resources, they act out of bad faith and it results in a quagmire of occupation. The rhetoric of liberation is not persuasive to the denizens of the occupied territories.

Echoing an earlier review, it is certainly true that Khalidi has his own agenda in place, but I found his book to be relatively even-handed. Compare him to his mentor Edward Said, who never met a sweeping generalization that he would not try to shoehorn into whatever thesis he was presenting. For example, take the role of Great Britain in the Middle East; Said was prepared to lay all the sins in the calendar at the doorstep of the Brits, while Khalidi actually compliments the British specialists at one point for having a more realistic appraisal of the region. (pp. 160-161) Overall, I found Khalidi to be fairly disciplined in his approach, which kept this book from becoming too much of a polemic.

One of the characteristics of a polemic is offering easy solutions to all problems. Khalidi does not pretend to have answers to the Iraq problem, or even the Palestinian problem, which can either open him up to criticism or praise, depending on one's perspective. The gist of his argument is that the current policies & approaches are clearly not working, and have not been working for a considerable amount of time, so why continue stubbornly to use them in the future? As Khalidi states regarding the assorted disputes in the region, "while resolving these disputes will not automatically bring democracy, failing to resolve them, allowing them to fester, or making them worse virtually guarantees the constan creation of new obstacles to democratization and respect for human rights." (p. 71)

Khalidi is quite upfront when he states that this is not a book for specialists, who should probably know everything that he is discussing already. Rather, it is more of a primer intended for the public in general which may not know or recall the history of the region. For example, anyone who was not an adult before about 1980 may not be aware that the US took a largely neutral position regarding Israel & the Palestinians, and opposed overtly aggressive acts by former colonial powers (Britain & France) in the region, most notably with the Suez Crisis of 1956. He also helps educate the public when he demonstrates how spectacularly ignorant key members of the Bush administration were regarding the region, as when they weighed the prospects of installing a member of the Hashemite royal family as the puppet ruler of Iraq (pp.51-52).

If the current administration is genuine in its desire to bring democracy to the region --- and Khalidi is obviously skeptical about this --- the anyone who was not already familiar with the region's history should be questioning both the administration's judgement and motives after reading this book. Those who strongly support an Israeli or neoconservative agenda will obviously have nothing good to say about this book (as evidenced by a few of the reviews here), but this book was not in any way intended for that particular audience. Khalidi understands that the public at large can only form opinions based on the information it is given, and the public is not comprised primarily of Middle East specialists. Khalidi obviously hopes to impart information that will better educate the public, and he does a good job of it with this well-written & cogently presented book.

This is a more thoughtful review than the one I had previously written.

First, I would still like to say that this is an exceptionally well-written book.


Professor Khalidi provides a much needed history lesson about the Middle East that most Americans are completely clueless about.

Written in a straightforward tone, Professor Khalidi's bona fides and sage advice are a refreshing counterbalance to the shallow, narrow-minded political commentators and other incompetents who reinforce racist stereotypes about the people, culture, and ouverall image of the Middle East.

Professor Khalidi presents a sharp, highly focused view of why Western encounters with the Middle East is fraught with so much turmoil and resistance.

He describes how the people of the Middle East resent the fact that control over their rich oil supply has always been structured to benefit Western needs and international commerce, how Western policies which rely exclusively on military force exacerbates and strengthens their resistance, and the unchanging, sanctimonious public declarations of bringing democracy and freedom on the one hand, and the unavowed agenda to control and direct the economies of the Middle East on the other hand that leads to the anger, fear, and distrust of anything Western imposed upon them.

For example, look at the current situation in Iraqi and the "100 Orders" enacted by L. Paul Bremer III, the former head of the Coalition Provisional Authority(CPA) and how its impact will leave the Iraqi people neither in control of their economic future nor free to come and go as they please.

Specifically, Order No. 39:(2.)100% foreign ownership of all Iraqis businesses.

This means that U.S. corporations such as Halliburton can buy up Iraqis businesses, do all the work , and send all the money back home. They are not required to hire Iraqis or reinvest in the Iraqi economy.

Thus, these "Orders" will not only devastate local Iraqis businesses, it will also burden the country with an enormous amount of debt.

Professor Khalidi's chapter on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict illustrates how uneven and lopsided the U.S. media's coverage is, apropos of what is actually happening on the ground.

While most Americans are aware of the injuries and killings that occur on both sides of this conflict and are deeply appalled and sickened by all this bloodshed, what Americans do not realize is how biased this cycle of violence is portrayed in the U.S. media.

The familiar pattern, in which a Palestinian suicide bomber kills innocent Israeli civilians and shatters their relative calm, this image then dominates the news, the Israeli army retaliates, and then the coverage dies down until another suicide bombing occurs.

While these images are shocking and horrifying, and no decent human being would ever condone suicide killings, it is the lack of and/or scant coverage of the violence that is routinely perpetuated against innocent Palestinian civilians living in the occupied territories, by Israeli soldiers, on an almost daily basis, since the intifada began in September 2000, and disproportionately kills and wounds more Palestinians(26,053) than Israelis(6,752) and therefore leads Palestinians to believe that some lives are more valuable and deserving of public acknowledgement and sympathy than others.

I, along with one of my favorite scientists, Albert Einstein, envisioned a peaceful, coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians.

However, after reading Professor Khalidi's book this ideal goal may be more wishful thinking than one grounded in reality.

Unless the leaders, Yasir Arafat and Ariel Sharon, change their obsolete, belligerent attitudes in which the end of the conflict means one side comes under the complete domination of the other and instead try to find a win-win solution, it is hard to believe that there will ever be peace in the Holy Land.

And speaking of leaders, our U.S. leaders constantly boast about the fact that America is the greatest democracy in the world, yet, when it comes to dealing with complex issues involving the Middle East, they do not adhere to its values.

Rather than endlessly and mindlessly debating within the same narrow circle of opinions, which are conjectural, reckless, and futile, they should welcome, encourage, and thoughtfully examine and listen to other points-of-view and perspectives, such as Professor Khalidi's.

By doing this, it will remove some of the persistent, intransigent cultural biases, and promote an open dialogue and diplomatic exchange that will hopefully lead to a gradual conflict resolution between Middle Easterners and Americans.

Finally, it is important to realize that restoring access and control of the rich resources and its benefits to the people of the Middle East and building a strong, fully-functioning democracy from the bottom-up, one which will not be vulnerable to foreign intervention, will be the sine qua non of ensuring, long-term peace and stability and resurrecting this beautiful and grand region known as the cradle of civilization.

Thank you Professor Khalidi for having the courage to write this book and enlightening our minds with your keen insight and superior, in-depth knowledge of the history of the modern Middle East!

An excellent history from precolonial to contemporary relations. Does not create a "faux Islam" purported to explain things like the Orientalists, Lewis, Huntington. Does not argue from Zionist presumptions while recognizing a fait accompli of Israeli aggression to a point.

Useful, even necessary, balance for those spoon fed by the mainstream media and phoney 'pundits' (Khalidi has choice examples of their sometimes absurd incompetence). Masterly use of history and historical analysis rather than ideolgy or neoCon fictions to explain the present predicament.

Not excusing locals for appalling politics in the Middle East he recognizes a not inconsiderable Western role that has disrupted and skewed developments. Readers need to know this reality or they will be mislead by ideologues whether Bush, NeoCon, Zionist, or any other brand of Fundamentalist claptrap including those 'preaching' a World War IV and unending war on terrorism.