The Vanishing 'Arab' in Middle East and American Politics

Ray Hanania
Wed, 09 Mar 2016 21:00:00 -0800
Opinion

There was a time when the operative word in any discussion of the Middle East was "Arab." Today, that word is "Muslim," and it's changing the dynamics of America's discourse, policies and politics with the Middle East.

Most Muslims are not Arabs. Their priorities are different from most Arabs' priorities. Of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims, only 20 percent are Arab. The rest are African and Asian.

This distinction allows American politicians to play a shell game with Middle East politics, distracting American citizens with the issue of "Muslims" to hide the true heart of Arab identity: Palestine.
Updated: Thu Mar 10, 2016

There was a time when the operative word in any discussion of the Middle East was "Arab." Today, that word is "Muslim," and it's changing the dynamics of America's discourse, policies and politics with the Middle East.

Most Muslims are not Arabs. Their priorities are different from most Arabs' priorities. Of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims, only 20 percent are Arab. The rest are African and Asian.

This distinction allows American politicians to play a shell game with Middle East politics, distracting American citizens with the issue of "Muslims" to hide the true heart of Arab identity: Palestine.

America's Middle East policy is not defined by justice or morality, but rather by fear, stereotypes and the powerful influence of the pro-Israel lobby. It is all about being anti-Palestine.

You cannot be elected into a national office if you strongly criticize Israel or praise Palestine. But there is a subtle difference between the approach of Republicans and Democrats. Republicans criticize Palestine in front of their defense of Israel; Democrats put Israel ahead of their criticism of Palestine.

Both Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio defend Israel, but their criticism of Palestine is incendiary. Rubio has said that "the Palestinian Authority, which has strong links to terror, (teaches) kids that it's a glorious thing to kill Jews."

Hillary Clinton, a Democratic presidential candidate, has been loud and outspoken in her support of Israel, and soft-spoken and obtuse in her views on Palestine. While elected as U.S. senator, Clinton supported Israel's settlements and criticized Palestinians. She also strongly backed Israel's right-wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Donald Trump, on the other hand, has forcefully declared his desire to remain neutral on the issue of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, an almost unprecedented stance in any recent American election. It's almost unheard of that any American presidential candidate would declare a neutral position.

Rubio generalized an entire race of people as supporting violence, yet no one criticized him the way they criticize Trump for his racial references to Muslims. Muslims didn't criticize Cruz in 2014 for telling a gathering of Middle East Christians that "those who hate Israel hate America." Many Muslims are supporting Clinton, despite her failure to push Palestine statehood.

This double standard in American politics makes it OK to bash Palestine, but not OK to bash Israel or non-Arab Muslims.

I don't believe Trump is anti-Muslim. He's not an establishment politician, but his words aren't processed by political consultants the way Clinton, Cruz, Rubio and so many others do. The career politicians filter their words and mislead the public about their views. It's one reason why establishment politicians frequently break campaign promises after they are elected. Trump has failed in his sloppy campaign rhetoric, but his words are daring.

During past presidential campaigns, the only real debate about the Middle East has been about which candidate is more pro-Israel. But this time, the Democratic and Republican establishments are ganging up on Trump. More importantly, the powerful pro-Israel lobby that's active in American politics will most likely not allow any candidate to speak like that.

Trump has set himself apart from his competitors, most likely angering The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and Sheldon Adelson, an American business magnate and owner of Israel's largest newspaper. Both the AIPAC and Adelson heavily fund and influence American presidential candidates and elections. Adelson is said to be the single largest donator to American election campaigns. Their criteria for support is a candidate who embraces Israel and rejects Palestinian rights.

It amazes me why so many Arab Muslims can't see the problem for what it is. They don't understand that Trump is not a professional politician. As an anti-establishment candidate, Trump says what he feels in the moment.

I don't believe Trump will not ban Muslims from entering this country; he will develop a strategy to protect Americans from terrorists like the American-born Syed Rizwan Farook and foreign-born Tashfeen Malik, both non-Arab Muslims from Pakistan, who killed 14 Americans last December in San Bernardino, California.

Most of the violence by Muslims against Americans has come from non-Arab Muslim extremists, not from Arabs. Arab extremists, like Hamas, are anti-Israel but not anti-American. AIPAC lobbying prevents Americans from seeing that difference.

Pro-Israel extremists and politicians don't fear Muslims. They fear Arabs. They eagerly exploit the American public's misinformed Middle East dyslexia to incite hatred against "Arabs" while defending "Muslim" rights.

So, I don't know how long Trump will continue to support a "neutral" position on negotiations between Israel and Palestine, but as long as he does, as a Christian Arab who most Americans see as a Muslim, I have to support him over Clinton, Cruz or Rubio.