Book review

Fred Halliday

Saqi Books, London, 2002, 256pp, £12.95

We have come to expect quality scholarship from Fred Halliday, Professor of International Relations at the London School of Economics. This latest work by this prolific author is remarkable in a variety of ways, not least for the uneven quality of scholarship which it contains.

At times, Halliday’s analysis is uncritical, even simplistic. He lets slip through a classic piece of disinformation regarding the 1969 burning of the Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem, responsibility for which Arab sources have unfairly attributed to the Israeli Government. Halliday builds on this, making a specious comparison with the Taliban destruction last year of the Buddhist statues in Bamyan.

Furthermore, in his discussion of terrorism, he draws a long bow in equating Islamist and Christian terrorism motivated by religious concerns, neglecting to address the obvious differences in scale of these phenomena. Perhaps the most astounding comment is reserved for the current Israeli-Palestinian deadlock, when he says "In Palestine, who is responsible for the impasse in the peace process? It is not the Palestinians, whose demand for an independent state is being denied." (204). If only it were that simple!

Halliday is clearly more comfortable in discussing political science than theology. He comments that the "anti-Semitic rhetorics of the Arab and Muslim worlds reflect above all a recent and contemporary history" (118). This shows clearly his lack of exposure to the corpus of Islamic writings down the ages which have stereotyped the Jews as devious, money-grabbing, and even at times sub-human. Furthermore, his own essentially secularist perspective comes through: "I admire the work of the anthropologist Michael Gilsenan... He writes about what Muslims do in their societies, but never relies on any of the holy books..." (196). This is a fundamental flaw with Halliday’s approach, reflecting his (and probably Gilsenan’s) own view of the marginality of religious faith. This is, of course, the western dilemma, having separated sacred from secular to the point that the sacred has no place left at all.

Nevertheless, there is much to commend significant parts of this volume. Halliday shows considerable powers of discernment and insight, especially with regard to the Middle East. He stresses that "the leaders and intellectuals of the Arab world and, more broadly, of the Islamic world have been criticized, rightly, for a failure to counter the half-arguments and demagogy of the Islamists." (37) He rejects attempts to reduce the complexities of Middle East power politics to one single conflict, declaring that "The Arabs cannot blame everything on Israel" (40). The fact that he clearly sympathises with the Palestinian side overall makes such a statement even more forceful.

Halliday devotes two chapters to negative stereotyping of Islam and Muslims by non-Muslims, which he refers to as "anti-Muslimism". He rejects the more common term "Islamophobia", arguing that it tends to portray Islam stereotypically, albeit in a positive way, thereby stifling valid criticism (128). He also points out that the hostile rhetoric being analysed by these terms is anti-Muslim or people-focused, rather than anti-Islam, or system-focused. This is a very good point which has been missed in the vast amount of writing on Islamophobia in recent years.

Perhaps the most satisfying aspect of this book is Halliday’s refusal to pass his analysis through the filter of political correctness. Whether we agree with his conclusions or not, the reader feels that Halliday is driven by a desire to find the truth, rather than the whims of passing ideological fads. He devotes a chapter to Left-wing knee-jerk criticism of the USA and all things American: "Too much discussion of the USA, in Western Europe as much as elsewhere, is guided by a set of lazy prejudices". He points out that the United States "fought ... wars in the 1990s – Kuwait 1991, Bosnia 1995, Kosovo 1999 – all in response to aggression against Muslim people." He finds such anti-American prejudice somewhat hypocritical, saying "Sneering at American aggressiveness comes strangely from other countries given their record in modern times: Britain and France, who trampled over half of Asia and Africa..." (49-50)

Halliday does not allow his firm views on the rights and wrongs of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to cloud his ultimate judgement, affirming that both Israelis and Palestinians clearly cannot live together in a single state, and that a two-state solution is the only sensible and fair outcome to the conflict between these two peoples: "The solution does not depend on the reconciliation of ancient or traditional antagonisms, but rather on the acceptance that Israelis and Palestinians are entitled to what other people have, neither more not less." (137) In this Halliday is at his best, making a contribution to the difficult search for peace, rather than merely trying to score points for his preferred side.

Finally, Halliday has no illusions about Saddam Hussein, and refuses to allow the sanctions issue to obscure the greater question of the threat posed by the Iraqi dictator. He declares "Saddam has not changed one jot, everyone knows it, and he could try to start the whole thing again tomorrow morning." (141) As for the future and the fraught question of whether to address the Iraqi threat, Halliday has a word of advice: "... equivocation on the part of European or Latin American states on the dangers currently posed by Iraq does not serve the interests of international peace or justice." (179)

If this review has said little about September 11, 2001, it merely reflects this book. The title of Halliday’s latest work is quite misleading. In effect, Halliday has cobbled together a series of his articles, most of which were written before September 2001, with one being written in 1991! This is a key factor in the uneven quality of this work. A cynic might suggest that Halliday was trying to cash in on the mood following last September’s tragic events. A far more likely explanation is that he was responding promptly to the present insatiable public appetite for analysis of the causes of the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington – and it is entirely appropriate that a man of his reputation and experience should comment. So although the book’s title promises focus, and the content provides broad context, the problem lies in the title, not in the book itself. Halliday’s presentation of background factors leading up to last September equips the reader far better than would have been the case with a detailed discussion of the "Two Hours that Shook the World". Moreover, his excellent concise conclusion answers the question underlying the title: "The root cause of this crisis is intellectual, the lack of realistic education and democratic culture in a range of countries, such that irrational hatred and conspiracy theory prevail over reasoned critique." (216)

Peter G. Riddell

[This review was published in St Mark’s Review, No. 189 (2002)]