We begin this issue with a Symposium entitled “Sartre and Terror.” It is introduced by Kenneth Anderson and it opens with a translation by Elizabeth Bowman of Sartre’s commentary on the 1972 Munich massacre. She has prefaced it with a summary of events. Next Ronald Aronson focuses on the events of 9/11 and distinguishes between permissible and destructive violence.
Roger Deacon, Ben Parker, Herman C. Waetjen, and Lasse Thomassen
Humanity, Terrorism, Terrorist War: Palestine, 9-11, Iraq, 7-7..., by Ted Honderich Roger Deacon
The Struggle for Meaning: Reflections on Philosophy, Culture and Democracy in Africa, by Paulin J. Hountondji Ben Parker
The Rationalists: Descartes, Spinoza and Leibniz by Pauline Phemister Herman C. Waetjen
The Divided West by Jürgen Habermas Lasse Thomassen
U.S. Foreign Policy and the U.S. Self
Robin W. Cameron
Why is it that one feels as though they have to say that 9/11 was a ‘tragic’, ‘terrible’ or ‘horrific’ event? Why is this inclination intensified if one seeks to comment critically on U.S. politics? Is it not clear that death on that scale and in that manner is without exception horrific, terrible and tragic? Or, is it that as a critical scholar I feel compelled to clarify that I am not with the terrorists simply because I intend to critique aspects of U.S. foreign policy? The point of this is not to argue that one should stop referring to 9/11 as ‘horrific’, ‘terrible’ or ‘tragic’, but rather to examine what causes individuals to monitor the way in which they act when they engage with a powerful foreign policy consensus.
Offensive Realism, the Bush Doctrine, and the 2003 Iraq War
Carlos L. Yordán
Research in the discipline of international relations finds that the great democratic powers are less likely to pursue revisionist policies. This investigation challenges this argument by showing that the United States' decision to oust Saddam Hussein's regime in March 2003 was consistent with a modified version of John Mearsheimer's theory of offensive realism, which finds that great powers' motivation is global hegemony. This article is divided into three sections. The first section considers the value of Mearsheimer's theory and reworks it by adding domestic variables to explain why states abandon defensive strategies for offensive ones. The second section shows how pre-9/11 American foreign policy strategy was, for the most part, status quo oriented, and section three explains why and how the Bush administration introduced a revisionist foreign policy strategy after the 9/11 attacks. This investigation concludes by showing how the 2003 Iraq War is the first step in the United States' quest for global hegemony.
Migration within, from and to the Middle East
Sabine Strasser and Shahnaz R. Nadjmabadi
During the last few decades, the range of key anthropological issues in the Middle East has changed remarkably. Along with relations between tribes and states, nomadism, kinship, ethnic and national conflicts, and tensions caused by oil and water, today’s post-9/11 effects and diversifying patterns of migration have increasingly attracted scholarly interest. Although they have entered the field of migration studies surprisingly late, social anthropologists have recently amplified their participation in this booming research area, particularly in transnational studies.
Murad Idris, David Albert, Yitzhak Dahan, Nancy E. Berg, and Barbara U. Meyer
Jacob Shamir and Khalil Shikaki, Palestinian and Israeli Public Opinion: The Public Imperative in the Second Intifada Review by Murad Idris
Eytan Gilboa and Efraim Inbar, eds., US-Israeli Relations in a New Era: Issues and Challenges after 9/11 Review by David Albert
Uri Cohen and Nissim Leon, The Herut Movement’s Central Committee and the Mizrahim, 1965–1977: From Patronizing Partnership to Competitive Partnership Review by Yitzhak Dahan
Sharon Aronson-Lehavi, ed., Wanderers and Other Israeli Plays Review by Nancy E. Berg
Shalom Goldman, Zeal for Zion: Christians, Jews, and the Idea of the Promised Land Review by Barbara U. Meyer
Its Consequences for Secularism
All too often, the question of Muslim minorities in Europe and America is discussedsolely in socioeconomic terms or with a simplistic focus on the Islamicreligion and its purported incompatibility with democracy. This article focusesinstead on the secularism of Western host societies as a major factor in the integrationof Muslim minorities. It compares French and American secularismand argues that while French-style secularism has contributed to present tensionsbetween French Muslims and the French state, American secularism hasfacilitated the integration of Muslims in the United States—even after 9/11.
Publications, Films and Conferences
Mark Slobin, Joobin Bekhrad, Florian Volm, Farideh Pourgiv, Paul Fox, Weronika Kuta, and Birgit Reinel
Baily, John (2015), War, Exile and the Music of Afghanistan: The Ethnographer’s Tale and Sakata, Hiromi Lorraine (2013), Afghanistan Encounters with Music and Friends
Tasfiya, Tajikistan, by Sharofat Arabova, 2014
Die Neue (The New Girl), Germany, by Buket Alakus, 2015
International Conference on Central and West Asia and Diasporas: The Transnational and Transgenerational, 14–16 March 2015, Inaugural Central and West Asia and Diasporas Research Network (CWADRN) Conference, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
Conference of Commission on Anthropology of the Middle East of the IUAES (International Union of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences), 9–11 September 2015, Cracow, Poland
Shakespeare and Marlowe in the Wake of 9/11
This article examines the relationship between Shakespeare and Marlowe as it has been portrayed in biographical forms in the early twenty-first century. Just six months before the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Katherine Duncan-Jones's biography of Shakespeare, entitled Ungentle Shakespeare, burst on the scene and the political landscape was as altered as the biographical renderings of the two playwrights. I begin my survey with a brief review of Duncan-Jones's book, before focusing on biographical works which followed hers to show how twenty-first-century biography has already re-written the relationship.
Democracy has been justified as the political system whose citizens are sovereign, which is to say most free or most equal in their political experience, participation or consent, and most likely to be benefited by economic freedoms. Most importantly, democracy is recommended as that form of government which gets things more right than any other form of government. But this traditional view, and also more recent qualifications of this view, is simply inadequate, refuted and rendered nonsensical by very real electoral, wealth, income and power inequalities in democratic societies. Nevertheless, it is this kind of hierarchic democracy, like those of the United States and the United Kingdom, whose systems of government are exactly not true to the idea that two heads are better than one and more heads better than two, which reaches to judgements about Palestine, 9/11, Iraq, 7/7 and about all that is to come after those things.