True story: My second night in London I was at a pub, the Rocket, I believe, in Euston. This was right after the orientation for international students, and I was sitting with some European fellow SOASians. One of them was a Dutch girl, the daughter of two Amsterdam lesbians who had grown up on a houseboat in a canal. Of course. She was starting research on her phd. When I started making the case for Western humanitarian intervention, she vehemently disagreed. Soldiers, she said, invariably harm civilians.
This is true, if one ignores the fact that civilians often harm civilians (Rwanda, Bosnia, the Poles, Ukrainians, Byelorussians and many more during the Holocaust). You can counter-argue military action caused the social upheavals that conditionally allow for widespread massacres of people by people, but then my counterargument is that stopping such violence goes beyond diplomacy, that it takes armies to stop roving death squads. I know the response—‘You’re only perpetuating a cycle of violence’—but intervention stopped the Serbians from wiping out Bosnian Muslims, and Serbia and NATO are hardly locked in a never-ending war.
I made that analogy, and the further one that if the world has followed her policy, her native Netherlands would still be run by Nazi Germany. “I hate that argument,” the Dutch girl said, with true anger. “That’s always the argument, that the Nazis would have stayed in Holland as occupiers. How do you know? How can anyone say whether this is true or not?”
So you can imagine my surprise when I found myself agreeing with the same girl at a lecture given by Sue Blackwell, a Birmingham professor who has lead the charge on a British academic boycott of Israel. In her blind rhetoric she believes universities, institutions devoted to dialogue, are dialoguing with the ideological equivalent of Nazi Germany (a good example of Reductio ad Hitlerium) when they hire Israeli professors and accept Israeli students. That it is impossible to differentiate individual Israelis from Israeli policy, and that Israeli policy itself could never be, in even the tiniest way, justified, although the speaker she appeared with said, in so many words, that suicide bombings were. That the crimes and deaths caused by Israel (always ‘Israel’; she never, in any way, suggested Israel-Palestine or any sort of shared culpability by both sides in that conflict) outweighed human rights abuses by China, Sudan, Burma, Iran, North Korea, or even, if we want to appeal to her ideological base, America. But why boycott America when Americans contribute so much money, publishing opportunities and tenure-ships to the comfortably ensconced European academic establishment?
Dutch girl attacked Blackwell at the latter’s lecture, and therein were the sort of alliances I was forced to make at SOAS: revisionists versus extremists.
Yet the school wasn’t all anti-Israel or anti-America. After the Blackwell lecture I went to a Klezmer concert in the student union and danced to Jewish traditional music with the Muslim son of a Bangladeshi diplomat. A dark-haired girl in my Southeast Asian politics class was enraged when I told her about the Blackwell speech—“These bloody radicals are trying to take over this school!” she said. “I’m Cypriot; do you hear me calling for a ban on Turks?”
Indeed, and especially at the postgraduate level, many of my fellow SOASians had extremely nuanced, interesting takes on current events and world politics. Unfortunately, the fringe, the people with signs that read “Nuclear weapons for North Korea and Iran!”, the neo-Communists (“I’ll tell them what life in a worker’s paradise is really like,” said a Czech friend as we walked by a Socialist Worker’s Party literature table, a dryly-delivered line that made me love her forever), were the visible side of the SOAS experience. And in a way, this was a good thing.
Because being at SOAS, packed as it is with Africans, Asians and Arabs (or their British-and European-born descendants) taught me my country and the West in general are, rightly or wrongly, pretty much reviled by a lot of people who suffered through colonialism. Those who don’t outright loathe the West still often view it with a high degree of suspicion. Then are those who actually embrace the West, transnational elites, who are usually viewed as sell-outs by their own people—who often happen to be the subjects, either outrightly politically or essentially economically—of the same transnational elites. In the West the nice-guy Left talk about engaging with the Third World but bemoan terrorism and violent militias. We assume the folks we dialogue with are moderates in our cause, people who balance between our diplomats and local interests. But at SOAS I realized a lot of these “moderate” Muslims, Africans, Asians, whatever, are often considered radical by their own.
“We support the Sheikh, mate,” a group of Muslim medical students at UCL told me once, and by ‘the Sheikh’ they meant Osama bin Laden. “So do most Arabs. Even if they don’t agree with his actual attacks, they support what he’s doing. They think America and Israel have to pay for their aggression on Muslims.” It was funny; I got along with these guys, watched them leer at three girls in hijabs, thought, ‘These could have been my friends if they weren’t in, well, a different tribe.” SOAS brought me face to face with the other tribe, the flip-side civilization in Huntington’s clash. I found I clicked with these people on an individual level, that we liked and respected each other (generally) if not all our ideas, that they were even willing to elect me as a student leader and go out with me for drinks (if they drank).
I learned they have the same trouble talking with us. Once the SOAS student union, which is famously pro-Palestine, tried to show it’s even-handedness by inviting Israeli jazz musician Gilad Atzmon to campus. Atzmon, the same Israeli who said "[W]e must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously...American Jewry makes any debate on whether the 'Protocols of the elder of Zion' are an authentic document or rather a forgery irrelevant. American Jews (in fact Zionists) do control the world." It was laughable, even if it was sad, like using Irshad Manji or Ayaan Hirsi Ali to speak for campus Muslims.
But I learned to ignore all this, because I did get along with people on individual levels and that, I figured, was my strike against the radicals on both sides of the fence (and having been back in the states since, I realize American hawks are just as intractable and idiotic as SOAS Islamists). And to take that analogy further, I realize the vast majority of Americans are mildly suspicious of Muslims but have no problem with having one as a neighbor, that in the end, we want to get on with our lives. I realize most Muslims are the same. I learned that within every Muslim there is not necessarily an American, but there are humans, with their own alliances and loyalties and biases and in the end, weaknesses, for women, bad TV and fast food, and that’s as good. If we don’t want to wipe each other out, it has to be.


Recent Comments