The dangers of misperception

To stop the violence, the Arab world and the West must take concrete steps to bridge cultural divides.

By ALON BEN-MEIR
Scene of attack on US consulate in Libya 300 (R) (photo credit: Esam Al-Fetori / Reuters)
Scene of attack on US consulate in Libya 300 (R)
(photo credit: Esam Al-Fetori / Reuters)
The flurry of analysis surrounding the tragic death of the US Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, along with three other Americans, demonstrates the limited understanding as to why these outrageous acts of violence occurred. The animosity by extremist Arabs toward western powers, especially the US, is at the core of these despicable acts.  However, since they are ultimately perpetuated by cultural disconnects and misperceptions, the onus remains on both sides to ameliorate the divide.
Many of the perceptions about the other are based on superficial information and irresponsible public narratives, and are colored by self-righteousness and hypocrisy.
On the western side, there is a growing tendency to believe that violence is exclusive to Islam; in fact, Christians have been killing each other for centuries. Westerners further accuse Arabs of being politically immature and culturally backwards. Yet, for example, Mesopotamia – today’s Iraq – was once the cradle of civilization. However, centuries of conquest and imperialism left little or no opportunity for self-advancement and development. After the establishment of Arab states following the world wars, the West supported Arab despots who ruled with iron fists and suppressed liberty and initiative. Finally, westerners accuse the Arabs of harboring unabated hatred and animosity toward the West when in fact the West had for decades exploited Arab resources with discriminatory policies dictated by national self-interest.
The Arabs, on the other hand, are quick to point out western corruption when many Arab governments are notorious for their rampant venality which includes robbing the nation’s wealth and stashing billions of dollars in western banks while depriving their people of basic necessities and elementary human rights. They accuse the West of being morally decadent and indulging in promiscuousness when many of them not only violate the basics of such moral tenants, but will go to great lengths to live in Western society. Whereas they rightfully condemn misguided anti-Muslim American or European zealots for producing videos or cartoons that insults Islam and the prophet Mohammad, they demonstrate little understanding that, unlike many of their own countries, American citizens constitutionally benefit from the freedom of speech. Finally, while some Arab states and Islamist groups seek to rid themselves of western influence, they still clamor for financial, technological, and military aid from the West.
No incident, however tragic it may be, can or should prevent America’s continued involvement in the Arab world. This is especially true now, since the historic transformations that the region has undergone will ultimately shape the socio-political and economic landscapes for both the Arab world and the US.
First, the US must be consistent when addressing the Arab upheavals in the wake of the Arab Spring. By virtue of its divergent interests and the prevailing internal conditions in any of the Arab states, the US cannot apply the same policies across the board. Nevertheless, it is imperative that American values are projected in a transparent manner and its involvement is not seen as serving solely the strategic interests of America.
The US’ military involvement in Libya, for example, was motivated by oil considerations whereas abandoning Egypt’s former president, Hosni Mubarak, was in order to maintain regional stability and the peace treaty with Israel. Because of the US' special alliance with Bahrain – the home of the American Fifth Fleet—America did nothing to condemn Saudi Arabia's suppression of the peaceful protests by Bahraini Shiites. And while Syrian President Bashar al Assad continues to butcher his own people, the US refuses to take decisive measures.
Moreover, the US looks for quick fixes, and promotes democracy as if it is the panacea that will instantly solve all the endemic socio-economic problems. Instead the US should calibrate its support for political reforms and financial assistance with newly-emerging Arab governments. For example, US economic assistance should be given on the condition that the funds are channeled toward sustainable development projects that empower the people and enhance the quality of life.
Knowing that the continued support of the US remains critical to most Arab states, be it for security or financial reasons, For their part, Arab governments, old and new, must realize that in order to continue receiving these benefits from the US,  they need to demonstrate commitment in fighting Muslim extremists.  Arab leaders must change their public narrative and express that it is in the interests of their countries to cooperate with the US.
Over time, this change in tone will serve to quell anti-American sentiments. Arab leaders that fail to change their public narrative should no longer be able to rely on unconditional American support.
Such steps, if implemented, will help to bridge the cultural divides between these two disconnected civilizations.
The writer is a professor of international relations at the Center forGlobal Affairs at NYU. He teaches courses on international negotiation andMiddle Eastern studies. alon@alonben-meir.com Web: www.alonben-meir.com