- The Washington Times - Friday, March 3, 2006

When the golden dome of the Askariya shrine, a holy Shi’ite site in Iraq, was blown up last week, enraged militias did not attack American bases but rather went after Sunni extremists who, they privately believed, were the real culprits.

How could that have been when clerics loudly railed to the cameras that the United States was the perpetrator?

Hamas, despite its hatred of the U.S. and unabashed pride in its terrorist suicide bombers, suddenly seeks victim status when Washington plans to cut Palestinian financial aid. If America is so terrible, why would Hamas want its tainted money?

On any given day, the state-run media of the Middle East publish vile anti-Semitism and various slanders against the West. With such an unapologetic assault on Western values, why would thousands riot when an obscure Danish publication runs a few tasteless cartoons caricaturing Islamic radicalism?

And why would Western crassness be surprising to radical Muslims anyway, given their constant harangue that we are decadent and should be shunned?

One answer to these paradoxes is that though scorn of the United States may be a public sport, most abroad privately value American financial support — thus acknowledging the often positive global role the United States plays.

The honor-bound Middle East’s leadership is obsessed with the West in general, and the U.S. in particular. It desperately seeks our undivided attention, and yet resents deeply that this very desire reflects either dependence or hidden admiration.

So Shi’ite clerics know the U.S. freed them from Saddam Hussein, sponsored democracy and offended most Middle East Sunnis by backing Shi’ites’ right to self-representation. Yet gratitude to the infidel cannot be altogether pleasant for a once-proud but recently demoralized people.

Hamas leaders desperately want a U.S. secretary of state to sanction their government and give them a status they routinely deride. Likewise, Middle Eastern media outlets practice a particular behavior for themselves while insisting on quite another one for others — expecting, like troubled teenagers, to be offensive and touchy at the same time.

There are other explanations for this apparent asymmetry that transcends the usual alternating of envy and hostility toward the more powerful and influential.

The Middle East has grasped that its oil warps our own morality and makes us put up with such psychological puerility. Autocratic regimes that often subsidize jihadists claim they fight them to win American attention — as odious right-wing dictatorships used to assure us they were our friends because they were at least staunchly anti-communist.

But there is another rarely discussed reason a two-faced Middle East feels it can be both savagely critical and needy of the U.S. We idealistic Americans are ourselves hypersensitive, but in a different way: We want to be liked at all costs.

Castigate an average American overseas for his support of democratic Israel and he will often apologize rather than cite America’s aid to Jordan, the Palestinian Authority or Egypt — much less the liberation of Kuwait, feeding of Somalia and saving of Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo.

We can see this strange psychological American need in the old conundrum over whether the United States is “hated.” Rarely do we specify “detested by whom”? The theocracy in Iran? The fundamentalist Wahhabis in the Gulf? Hamas terrorists? Sheiks who pump oil for $5 a barrel and sell it for $60?

Perhaps decades of well-meant multiculturalism have made us forget all cultures, sadly, are not equal — and how rare Western liberality and tolerance are, both in the past and now.

To remedy such anxiety, we need not advance American exceptionalism as chauvinism. Nor do we need to gratuitously remind theocracies, dictatorships, communist states and autocracies how cruel and corrupt they are to their own.

But Americans should develop the confidence to accept we are not liked abroad largely for good reasons — having had to often fight those who wished to destroy our liberalism, from Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini to Saddam and Osama bin Laden.

In Iraq’s case, America ended a murderous regime, took no oil, gave billions of dollars in aid and plans to leave as soon as a democracy can replace a dethroned dictatorship. While that apparently makes us loathed by many in the Middle East, it is nothing we should or will apologize for.

Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and author, most recently, of “A War Like No Other: How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War.”

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide