Prominent Authors Cannot Say What Any Fool and Fukuyama Know: Palestinian Issue Helped Fuel 9/11 Attacks

Yesterday, C-SPAN broadcast a panel from the L. A. Book fair called "Profiles in Terror," featuring several authors with expertise on the Arab world.  Someone in the audience asked forthrightly, "why do they hate us?" Why, she went on, were 20 militants so upset that they flew airplanes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon?

The experts all said that the hijackers were motivated by the lack of opportunity in the Arab world. Lawrence Wright, author of The Looming Tower, put it in strictly materialistic terms, saying that the gross national product of the Arab world was less than that of the Nokia company, if you take out oil revenues. Al Qaeda is a "function of the despair of the Arab world." Brian Michael Jenkins said that the Arab world was hung up on its "glorious past… the caliphate," and that the onslaught of Western culture had caused young men to embrace Jihad as the only answer. Jeffrey Goldberg said that even educated Muslims who come to America are upset by the prevalence of liquor stores and disturbed to see fellow Muslims dating Americans.

Not one of the respondents mentioned the Arab Israeli conflict.  Indeed, someone from the audience shouted, "what about our support for Israel?"  (That’s my impression, the audio was muffled) and was shouted down.

The panel’s explanations echo the Bernard Lewis theory of Muslim despair, that Arab youth is dejected and angered by the rise of the west. Isn’t it a little pathetic that six years on, the conventional wisdom continues to offer this socio-psychological theory as the only explanation for the attack?

The strongest rebuttal of this theory is that Osama bin Laden himself cited the Palestinian issue as one motivator for the attack. Writes Max Rodenbeck in the New York Review of Books:

Of all [bin Laden's] themes, the notion of payback for
injustices suffered by the Palestinians is perhaps the most powerfully
recurrent in bin Laden’s speeches… It has become fashionable to assert
that al-Qaeda’s attachment to the Palestinian cause is relatively
recent, and has been cynical and deliberately manipulative. That is
simply not true. As long ago as 1984, witnesses report bin Laden
shunning American goods to protest American support of Israel. His
fellow traveler Ramzi Yousef, who was convicted of the first assault on
the World Trade Center in 1993, testified that his sole motive was US
backing of Israel….Speaking just before the 2004 presidential
elections, bin Laden himself voiced amazement that Americans, deceived,
he supposed, by their government, had yet to understand that he had
struck America because "things just went too far with the
American-Israeli alliance’s oppression and atrocities against our
people."

And here is the former neoconservative Francis Fukuyama on the Arab-despair theory in his book America at the Crossroads (2006):

"Observers like Barry Rubin and Max boot have argued that when the Arabs say they care about the plight of the Palestinians, they don’t actually mean it; criticism of Israel or US support for Israel is a displacement of their unhappiness with their own undemocratic political systems, which they are not able to attack directly…. But [Fukuyama retorts] the seething anger against the United States in the Arab world over Palestine makes it much easier for the hard-core terrorists to operate, providing them with sympathizers, informants, and recruits.  When Arabs say that they like the United States but don’t like American foreign policy, it would seem both prudent and minimally respectful to take them at their word, rather than putting them on a psychiatrist’s couch and telling them that they couldn’t possibly mean what they say.

It’s not my point that yesterday’s experts are wrong about underlying issues. (They’re smart guys, observing true aspects of modern Islam.) Nor that the suffering of Palestinians justified the 9/11 suicide bombers; it doesn’t. The point is that there is something tragically wrong with our discourse. The woman was asking a question about what motivated a stupendous crime that is at the heart of the Iraq war disaster. And a group of prominent intellectuals cannot even name what any fool knows to be a simple grievance behind the attacks.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in US Policy in the Middle East

{ 5 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. Steven says:

    9/11 can be viewed as a stupid act to unleash unimaginable pain on Muslims and Westerners.
    ====================
    Anarchy was the obsession of the 9/11 fanatics.
    ====================
    All participants were mentally ill, socially unadjusted, and vulnerable to incitement.
    ====================
    One jihadi project leader was just captured.
    Abd al Hadi —
    link to debka.com
    />
    =======================
    The Iranian regime can't stop its worldwide plots. Iran is a failed state, like Hungary as described by Konrad. All efforts should be done to turn around this historic failures.
    —————
    We need intellectual innovations to come to the help of the suffering Iranians and Iraqis.
    ——————
    The oppressors and terrorists are small time barbarians, and we are suffering from the seeing of stoning of people, car-bombs on markets and more indescribable acts of barbarism.

    =============
    Should we not demonstrate against barbarism? Or just keep preaching peace to the converted?

  2. Klaus Bloemker says:

    Mohammed Atta (the 9/11 ringleader) lived in Hamburg, Germany. There was a court case against one of his aquaintances (a German) who was accused of having known about the plot. The judge asked him: 'what motivated Atta?' – the answer was: 'hating the theJews, there was always talk about hating the Jews.' But why the hell did Atta hate the Jews?

  3. Keen says:

    Why the hell did he hate the Jews?

    Why do people hate black people?
    Why do people hate white people?
    Why do people hate Mexicans?
    Why do people hate Muslims?
    Why do people hate Hindus?
    Why do people hate Christians?

    Why Klaus? Why?

  4. Klaus Bloemker says:

    My question was more rhetorical.
    What I remember from this court case, the German guy – in reponse to the judge's question about Atta's motivation – did not mention primarily America but Jews as motivating Atta.

  5. David says:

    Phil is right to emphasize the distortion in our public discourse. The fact that Americans weren't even allowed to know why they had been attacked is the best indication of the lobby's true power. I remember that within days of 9/11 Jack Straw, the British Foreign Minister, stated the obvious: that terrorism is bred by the anger that many people in the region feel over the war against the Palestinians. There was an uproar and he was called "antisemitic." From that point on there has been no public discussion of the motivations of the attackers.

    By the way, the linkage to Zionism's crimes is even more harrowing than Phil's quotes suggest. OBL claims that the very idea of toppling the office towers came to him while witnessing Sharon's bombardment of Beirut in 1982:

    "While I was looking at these destroyed towers in Lebanon, it sparked in my mind that the tyrant should be punished the same way and we should destroy towers in America, so that it tastes what we taste and would be deterred from killing our children and women."

Leave a Reply