Rigid Attitudes and Beliefs: An Exploration of Why the Middle East Lose Its Leaders - Research Paper Example

 Rigid Attitudes and Beliefs: An Exploration of Why the Middle East Lose Its Leaders The Middle East has always been known for its bloody and war-stricken history. Its rich history, from Mesopotamia and Persia to Israel and Palestine, is laden with wars fought against and for religion; for unknown to many, the Middle East was the starting point of three of the world’s largest religions: Judaism, Islam and, yes, Christianity (Mahallati, 1996). This is one of the significant reasons why the Middle East has become a battleground for idealistic, religious and political struggles. Although many historians and political analysts state that Middle Eastern turmoil and instability generally comes from external forces and intervention due to the territory’s vast resources, especially in oil, “much of the turbulence in the region is the result of internal power struggles, utopian aspirations of idealism and misled policies that originate from within the region” (Mahallati, 1996). These internal power struggles can be seen as a result of Middle Eastern culture and its religious roots, as well as rigid cultural concepts that promote hatred and revulsion of everything that is not Arabic. These cultural and religious ideologies only serve to hinder the region’s advancement through the constant use of violence; so much so that “the end result of such a metamorphosis is that throughout the region’s history, the followers of ideological movements have frequently displayed a zealous and unwavering commitment to their principles in a manner sometimes described as being “more Catholic than the Pope” (Mahallati, 1996). These unbending and unyielding attitudes and beliefs can be seen as having created a whole list of tyrants and dictators—leaders that only serve to increase the turmoil in the Middle Eastern lands. So, when asked the question why the Middle East keeps on losing its leaders, a more appropriate question to ask is why the Middle East installs leaders that are destined to fall or leaders that create a destiny that makes the nation’s fall and/or stagnation inevitable. The answer to this question is simple in its complexity. With the history of the region having its roots in the propagation of ideological beliefs and attitudes that are rooted in the Muslim faith, such as the concept of honor and shame, the intense focus on superiority and strength, the dominion of men over women, and the rejection of everything that is not Muslim, it is inevitable that the Middle East produce leaders that are meant to be “lost” (Raphaeli, 2007). Middle Eastern leaders have generally been equated to dictators and tyrants, with Israel being the only democracy in the region (Middle East Info, 2003). With these types of power-hungry leaders, a history riddled with violence, and an over-emphasis on concepts of honor and shame, superiority and strength, and masculine dominance, it is not doubtful why Middle Eastern leaders are assassinated. They kill each other in order to position themselves as the most powerful in the land (Pryce-Jones, 2003). Modern history has seen the curtailment of such acts of terror dictatorship that has led to Saddam Hussein’s execution. It can be seen here how the two most prominent ways of how Middle Eastern leaders are lost is also through violence—assassination and execution. This paper will provide a discussion of these factors and present examples of how these inflexible and rigid ideologies, beliefs and attitudes have paved the way for the creation of dictators and the prevalence of violence that has ultimately led to the loss of Middle Eastern leaders. Furthermore, this paper will assert that due to these harsh cultural factors, the real leaders that could have led the Middle Eastern nations into a successful transition into the 21st century were suppressed and overpowered. The Cultural and Historical Roots of Violence Truly, the Cradle of the First Civilization, Middle Eastern culture can be described as one of the richest cultures in the world, spanning centuries of colonization, upheavals and revolutions in the fight for recognition. Indeed, the Middle East is one of the few regions in the world that can speak of this kind of violence and turbulence in their history (Mahallati, 1996). From the Crusades to the violent rise of the Ottoman Empire, the Middle East has indeed been home to a region that has shed the greatest blood. It seems that it can be concluded that chaos brought about by violence is one of the continuous and episodic events that can be expected from the Middle East. The advent of many religions, particularly Islam, has co-existed with the Middle Eastern history of violence and turmoil (Mahallati, 1996). Islam has been blamed numerous times for the intolerance and hatred for non-Muslims that have been cultivated and reinforced throughout Middle Eastern history (Sultan, 2009). Dr. Wafa Sultan (2009), a Syrian by birth, has asserted that “Islam itself is not and cannot be moderate” and so Muslims really do have a tendency to become extremists. Thus, violence and religion has perpetuated the consolidation of a certain kind of attitude and culture; that is, they have bred a culture that gives highest importance to strength, superiority and honor (Raphaeli, 2007). These patterns of behavior that have been created and sustained by Middle Eastern history has engendered the proliferation of dictators and tyrants who are bound to fall—in one way or the other (De Atkine, 1999). So, what exactly are these attitudes and beliefs that have led to the detriment of many leaders in the Middle East? The next sections will answer this question in order to show how they have contributed a lot to the loss of many of Middle East’s leaders and the suppression of would-be great leaders. The Concept of Honor and Shame Honor in Arab culture comes in two forms: sharaf and 'ird (Feldner, 2000). Sharaf relates to family honor and the honor of the individual members of the family (Feldner, 2000). It can either increase or decrease, depending on the manifestation of generosity, hospitality, courage in battle and other signs of strength and superiority (Feldner, 2000). ‘ird, on the other hand, pertains to the honor of women that can only decrease (Feldner, 2000). It is similar to the western concepts of charity and purity (Feldner, 2000). It can be seen here how even the Middle eastern virtue of honor is tainted with gender prejudice. This leads men, not only to think of themselves as superior and treat women as second class citizens, but to also take too much pride in the masculine characteristics of being strong and superior. They dominate their women and others around them just so they can prove that they are better—that they are the best. It leads them to commit violent and heinous acts in the name of the honor that they so value. For instance, the brutal execution of a 16-year-old Jordanian girl, Kifaya Husayn, through the hands of his own brother—because the girl was raped by another brother and was deemed to have decreased the honor of their family—is just one of the numerous killings done in the name of honor (Feldner, 2000). The violent underpinning of the concept of honor is best seen in a statement uttered by Saddam Hussein in an interview with Dan Rather: “We will die here. We will die in this country and we will maintain our honor, the honor that is required, in front of our people” (Pryce-Jones, 2003). Here, Saddam epitomizes how the Arab culture defines honor—through violent acts that show their power and strength and through a sadistic death that not only kills one—the more deaths, the greater the honor. The greater the violence shown in acts that are seen to be nationalistic, especially against the West, the greater the honor they feel they are achieving for themselves, their family and their country. In fact, even though Saddam has been proven to have killed more than a million during his rule as the Supreme Leader of Iraq, “most Arab people in the Middle East had looked upon [him] as the last figure of defiance against the West almost as if he were a hero (Dietzler, 2003; Knox, 2003). This just goes to show how violence in the name of honor is widely accepted in the Arab world. This kind of honor deeply valued in Middle Eastern countries is something that has led to the killings of innocent people at the hands of their own family members and the rise of a leader that is responsible for such carnage and the threat of mass destruction that international powers, particularly the United States, have deemed it necessary to intervene and put a stop to it (Kengor, 2007). The antithesis of honor is shame and when one does something that will decrease the family or person’s honor, it is viewed in the Arab world as something unacceptable that people have been killed because of causing shame in order to restore honor (Feldner, 2000). “\Honor is understood in a complex way as the absence of shame, for honor and shame are bound to one another as complementary, yet contradictory ideas (Fluehr-Lobban, 1994 as cited in Muller, 2000). There are many ways that shame is bestowed and one that critical to an Arab is that no one must never know about a shameful act that was committed (Muller, 2000). For instance, making one’s defeat in battle made known to many is something that can cause a man to weep in public because of shame. This is what the late Egyptian president Gamal Abdul Nasser did when he lost the Six-Day War (Jacoby, 1996, p. 3). It can be seen here how shame is a feeling so negative that it can cause a president to cry in public. With the intense humiliation attached to the concept of shame, the value of honor has become greater in that Arabs would kill just for its protection and restoration. Hence, when leaders commit a mistake, the public very easily loses faith, as what happened to great historical leaders David Ben Gurion of Israel and Anwar Sadat of Egypt (Quandt, 1998). Even though these two Middle Eastern leaders have lobbied for peace and greatly advanced its concept in the region, controversies that were found to be shameful marked the end of their careers and people did not speak well of them until just in the recent years (Quandt, 1998). In this sense, the loss of Middle Eastern leaders can be seen to stem from the peoples’ attitudes towards honor and shame. Their leaders cannot make mistakes, which is also the reason why dictators and despots such as Saddam Hussein thought it necessary to use force and torture to maintain their power and hold on to their positions. Superiority Complex John Moberly (as cited in Knox, 2003), former British Ambassador to Iraq, states his dismay in Saddam’s talents and intelligence in that the man thought to be as the Supreme Leader of Iraq for almost three decades “certainly had the ambition to be the great Arab leader of the new century, outrivaling [former Egyptian President Gamel Abdul] Nasser and perhaps trying to compare himself with Saladin in the Middle Ages, fighting the crusaders. He had the kind of ambition to be regarded as a great national heroic figure.” Indeed, Saddam’s ambition was great; however, it crossed the line to fanatical due to the superiority complex that was not uncommon of Arabs, not to mention their leaders. This can be seen in the way Iraq’s leaders kill each other—with the old one needing to be annihilated to assert the power of the new (Pryce-Jones, 2003). Although Saddam was the one exception wherein he didn’t kill his predecessor, for whom he seemingly served as a loyal Vice-President, “he quickly made sure to murder all those among Bakr's associates who might have emerged as possible rivals, just in case anyone mistook him for soft-hearted” (Pryce-Jones, 2003). This is another clear example of how the Middle East has lost another good leader in Saddam’s precursor, Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr, for before he was overthrown, Iraq saw a marked improvement in literacy and public health (Knox, 2003). This was cut short when, due to Saddam wanting to be superior above all others; he forcibly removed Bakr from power and established his dictatorship through the most violent acts, which for him and for most of the Middle East showed how superior he was. It was because of the fact that “Hussein actually believed in his own greatness” that caused him to act rashly and heinously and to underestimate his opponents in the international scene (Knox, 2003). Conclusion It can be seen through the analysis of how violence and religion is inexorably intertwined within the historical and cultural aspects of the Middle East that the question of how Middle Eastern leaders are made is tantamount to their failure and the failure of good leaders to stay in power. Islam is a religion that is thought to be something that cannot be practiced in moderation and it has taught intolerance and hatred for non-Muslims. This, coupled with the fact that the Arab culture is laden with a twisted concept of honor and shame and an intense drive for superiority, has perpetuated the emergence of dictators and tyrants who kill off any possibilities of good leadership and progress on the reconciliation between their religious and ideological views with the modern world. In this sense, when tyrants rise to power, such as Saddam Hussein, their terrible ways already foretell their downfall. This is evident in the way Saddam Hussein was deemed to be guilty of perpetuating crimes against humanity and was hanged for everyone in the world to see. Saddam, with his ambition and intelligence could have been the great leader who could have done many positive changes, not only to Iraq, but to the Middle East in general. However, because of the extreme emphasis he placed on honor and superiority, he failed to live up to his natural talents. In a way, the day he was born began the journey towards his downfall and the loss of a would-be great Middle Eastern leader. Furthermore, the emergence of dictatorships and the battle for supremacy literally kills off good leaders. This is another way that the Middle East loses great leaders that could have facilitated the transition of the region into the 21st century. Moreover, the focus on honor and shame creates a perfectionist paradigm that allows no room for mistakes—at least those that the public know about. The examples of Anwar Sadat and Nasser’s political careers ending in humiliation brought about by various controversies and the resulting public denouncement of the achievements they have done for their respective countries show how this is another way that Middle East countries lose good leaders—leaders that they should have been proud of. It can be concluded then that the rigid Arab culture and the beliefs and attitudes that it engenders contribute greatly to how Middle Eastern leaders are lost. References De Atkine, N. B. (1999, December). Why Arabs Lose Wars. The Middle East Quarterly, 6(4). Dietzler, B. (2003). The Fall Of Saddam Hussein: What does it mean? Retrieved from http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/middle_east_current_affairs/100572 Feldner, Y. (2000). "Honor" Murders – Why the Perps Get off Easy. The Middle East Quarterly, 7(4). Jacoby, M. (1996). Shame and the Origins of Self-Esteem: A Jungian Approach. New York: Routledge. Kengor, P. (2007, January 7). The Rise and Fall of a Dictator. The Washington Times, p. B03. Knox, K. (2003). Iraq: The Rise And Fall Of Saddam Hussein. Global Security. Retrieved from http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/12/iraq-031215-rferl-154556.htm Mahallati, M. (1996). The Middle East in search of an equilibrium between transcendent idealism & practicality. Journal of International Affairs, 50(1), pp. 120+. Middle East Info. (2003). Advancing Democracy, Pluralism and Mutual Respect in the Middle East. Retrieved from http://www.middle-east-info.org/gateway.html Muller, R. (2000). Honor and shame in a Middle Eastern setting. Retrieved from http://nabataea.net/h&s.html Pryce-Jones, D. (2003, March 24). The Rise and Fall of Saddam: Getting into the Supreme Leader's Mind. National Review, 55(5). Quandt, W. B. (1998, April 13). Middle East Leaders of the Twentieth Century. Time Magazine (International Edition). Raphaeli, N. (2007). Culture in Post-Saddam Iraq. The Middle East Quarterly, 14(3). Sultan, W. (2009, October 20). "The Muslim World Needs Reform." Middle East Forum. Retrieved from http://www.meforum.org/2488/the-muslim-world-needs-reform Read More