Focus 580; Legacy of the Prophet: Despots, Democrats, and the New Politics of Islam

This morning in this hour focus 580 will be talking about politics in the Middle East. And our guest for the program is Anthony Shadid he was recently Cairo correspondent for The Associated Press and he's a winner of an Overseas Press Club citation in 1907 for a series of articles that form the core of a book that we'll be talking about this morning the title of the book is legacy of the prophet. The subtitle despots Democrats and the New Politics of Islam and what he argues in the book is that when you look at Islamic politics you can see there has been a change as people have moved away from militancy and toward democracy and I think that he would argue that it's a change that has been going on some time now but perhaps a lot of the news coverage that we get in the Middle East. And of Islamic politics generally has not reflected this change. And that's behind his interest in doing this and talking about it. He was also formally news editor of The Associated Press. Los Angeles bureau. And now he is correspondent in

Washington for the Boston Globe newspaper and he's talking with us by telephone as we talk. Your questions are welcome. All you need to do is give us a call the number here in Champaign Urbana 3 3 3 9 4 5 5. Also we have a toll free line that's good for you if you would be would be having to make a long distance call. Well pay for the call 800 to 2 2 9 4 5 5. So again three three three. WRAL toll free 800 to 2 2 W while at any point. You have questions comments. You can call us. Mr should eat Hello. Hi thanks for talking with us thank you. Appreciate it. I'm just curious when you're posting to the Middle East being a Mideast correspondent it did that it did have something to do with the fact that you're Arab-American or was that just an accident. Well it was define a lifelong interest it's something that I had wanted to do since I was much younger. I said years of learning Arabic for that purpose I did. My parents are Lebanese but I didn't grow up

speaking Arabic so I mean I had to go back to school tomorrow and spend some time in Cairo actually in the early 90s on a fellowship. So it you know it was always in the cards to go to the Middle East and did. I'm interested it made some point in the book you talk about the fact that perhaps being Arab-American was something of a help in trying to understand the politics of the Middle East and at the same time because you truly were you were an American you truly weren't worried Arab that you were you felt in some way connected and yet able to maintain some distance. Right and I thought you know it's a I'm sure of a lot of hyphenated Americans have the same feeling that you feel and I felt much more Arab in the United States but much more American in the Arab world and that's something I was carried as a reporter. Plus my my family was Christian so I didn't share you know the Muslim faith with the people that I interviewed often and I also had another I think nuance to the relationship. You know probably more important a thing that was was Arabic and speaking Arabic to kind of I think gave me a window on you know on people in conversations on trends that I might not have otherwise.

Yeah. Do you think that here this trend that you're talking about in the book is the trend moving making a movement away from militancy and toward other sorts of strategies to achieve political goals. Is that something that you feel that a lot of the media has missed. Well I almost think it's counterintuitive and I think if you asked most Americans their images or their impressions of the Middle East it is much in this new direction. It is this idea of violence of terrorism of clashes and bloodshed almost like a that there's a there's a the people over there have a penchant for violence. You know I think the latest thing was the bombing of the USS Cole off the coast of Yemen but even before that the bombings of the embassies in Africa and then almost kind of an association in the popular mind with you know between Moammar Gadhafi for instance and Libya and terrorism or Saddam Hussein or the Iranian revolution all these kind of. Jumble up even when they're not. I don't know so I have a direct link to Islam of the faith. My sense and spending the years over there and and putting the book together was that

that I think there are some very vibrant currents within political Islam that are being overlooked and are being overlooked by because the nature of journalism I think I think we spend our time covering the news in the news tends to be that the dramatic and the violent and so these kind of trends that I was looking at in the book this idea of of moderating of embracing democracy of looking for coalitions of you know actually offering hope for politics over there that tends to get overlooked because it's not as exciting you know. And certainly I know that this is something that that grieves Muslims greatly that somehow in in the minds of so many people their faith gets associated with violence and it may indeed be as you say just a matter of you know if someone is a suicide bomber that's going to get a lot of attention but if you look at groups that are that are working to try to say in nonviolent means to improve the lives of people in refugee camps or places where people are disadvantaged

that that's that's you could argue that's a story but that's not going to get the kind of coverage that a bombing is going to get. Probably not enough to end it. You know and by no means don't want to make you know make the argument that there is not terrorism that is carried out by Islamic activists they're obvious. Yes there's no question about a poem or one person pointed out to me I thought it was a it was a really good point was that you know Granted there is terrorism that is to commit in the name of Islam at the same time you know we wouldn't say what David Koresh for instance did in Waco is somehow representative of Christianity or what Goldstein did in the massacre in Hebron in the West Bank is somehow indicative of Judaism I thought it's a good point. But by the same virtue we wouldn't say it would have some of Bin Ladden does it some speaks to the nature of Islam and it's a point at least I took it as a point well taken. You know I think there is. When you mention this idea of it might be a story that might not be a memory of spending time in Lebanon a couple of years back and I was doing a story on on his blog and I think a lot of listeners

remember has been lost in the 1980s as a group that you know bombed a U.S. Marine barracks kidnapped foreigners attacked the U.S. embassy I mean was it was pretty much I think in a lot of Americans minds you know the symbol of terrorism in the Middle East. What I was doing when I was a reporter in Lebanon was trying to look at what his blog was doing you know that went beyond that and in fact he really kind of has said this terrorist image at least. Levanon I think most Lebanese see it as it probably is a social group maybe a political group but you know also a guerilla group in the middle is fighting Israelis in southern Lebanon and for most of the 90s but but in Lebanese minds it's definitely a political and social group and trying to get that across. You know as a journalist as a writer was difficult I ran into a lot of I think a lot of misperceptions by editors and you you also have written some of the same things about Hamas. That's right how about I mean a massive list is a group that still are elements of the mass are still engaged and I think what most would define as terrorism is no question about it. That's not the complete picture of the group and I guess it depends on how much do we want to understand how much we want to pursue what exactly is going on and I think we do want to

get the broadest most complete picture we need to see what mass doing is doing as a political organization. Let me at this point maybe I should just really quickly introduce our guest again we're talking with Anthony Shadid He's a journalist he has worked for the Associated Press. He's been a foreign correspondent reporting from Cairo for the AP he also was the Associated Press. Los Angeles was an editor at the L.A. bureau. Right now he's working for The Boston Globe as their Washington correspondent he's been a lot of time in the Middle East in North Africa. And West Asia talking with people there and has put together a book titled Legacy of the Prophet west of you is the publisher west of you press it is in the bookstore Now if you want to look at and questions are welcome to 333 W. while toll free 800 1:58 WLM. What I would like you to do is talk a little bit about what we mean or what you mean when you use a phrase like Islamic politics and I think here I

think is something something of the root of why it is we have such difficulty dissin tangling the faith from the actions of the people who profess it. That in other cases there is not this close association between the religion and politics so we don't. You one might in this country talk about for example Christian politics but we don't really talk about that very much but certainly we do talk about Islamic politics what exactly does that mean. I think it's a good point to raise because I it's something that I wrestle with definitely on the blog. You know I think a lot of the time I spend in the books you know making a point or making the observation that it is Islam itself is one of them. It's just it is it is a state of breathtaking diversity. I mean to call Islam the same in Afghanistan in Egypt for instance is it's hard argument to make there's there's obviously you know similarities in doctrine and in the core beliefs of the religion but how it's practiced how it's you know its history its traditions they're incredibly different from country to country even

within country so I think you're right it's something that they can be overgeneralizing can lead. I think a lot of misperceptions. My feeling was that political Islam was or Islamic politics was you know was a movement that that had sought to carry out political or economic or social change within the framework of the religion they were using the religion as the justification for those changes and and I think by no means is political Islam. You know the same across the region. But it does speak to similar things. And my challenge in the book I think was to find out how there are the similarities how there are those trends that joined disparate movements and in different countries and bring them together and I think there is there are there are points that do that they do share across borders you know across languages across cultures. Well that let's let's go to that point because that was going to be very My very next question see if you could talk a little bit about what it is given the fact we're acknowledging the fact that we'd probably too often talk about Islam in monolithic terms or

acknowledging the fact that it is different from place to place the people are different. They're based cultures are different their concerns are different. There seemed though to be some common threads and reasons for the fact that so many people particularly young people and and. Well-educated people have been drawn to Islamist movements. What is that going I'm sorry I'm sorry I was stunningly well but they're basically that's the question What is it that has drawn people into these movements. I think you know the first and foremost political Islam is the language of opposition and the Muslim world today. And I speak about that you know from Turkey to the Arab world and beyond it's in maybe after World War 2. Even before the war too there was anti-colonial movements there were leftist movements Marxism Communism spoke to frustration anger an opposition I think today if you're looking for a language of opposition it's encapsulated within political Islam and there's a certain flexibility that brings because opposition by its very nature is flexible. I mean it is opposing to. When circumstances different governments different

conditions and I think that flexibility makes political Islam so viable. You know I think kind of wrapped up in that is just is is really how we look at the you know the good the constellation of power in the world I mean it when I came home to United States in 1909 it struck me how much confidence United States has I mean we're really ashamed of our actions we're really you know apologetic about what we do in the world stage. When you spend time in the Middle East the Arab world or the Muslim world I'm always struck by the insecurity that is there it's almost always a big concern over of reputation over how they look to other people. And it's very different from what you see I think in the West which is you know obviously the most powerful. Region in the world. And I think political Islam feeds into that idea that there is a feeling of being under siege of being overwhelmed by western culture western power the military economy you know its social institutions and that influences you know political Islam seeks to counteract that to somehow preserve culture traditions and heritage and that can often a lot in a lot of instances that's

just a personal feeling you know that never gets turned into politics. But often it is to turn into politics and it can be a very powerful current because it speaks to the very you know very essence of a person's identity. We have one caller to bring in and I'm sure we'll have others. Let's start by talking with a person in Champaign. 1 1 1 0 0 0. Well perhaps I'm calling a bit too soon because I wanted to talk perhaps about what you mean by this democracy. For example when I think of developing democracies in the Arab world perhaps I start thinking of these newer younger leaders and Jordan or Morocco or Syria or the hurricane maybe the train being the best example when people haven't voted in democratic forms. But I don't know how this relates to Islam and politics. That's number one maybe Islam in politics has put pressure on these younger leaders who are also many times educated in the West. But the point I want to get to but maybe you need to go by that route first is

what this lemming politics as you just said there's a kind of return to culture tradition heritage which sometimes you know means a return to the veil which I don't necessarily think means that you know I don't equate that with you know some kind of negative position necessarily for women. But within the idea of you know. A greater democracy perhaps through an Islamist model or through legacy of the prophet. What do you see the position in the late 90s and early 21st century for women. Are they making progress. What kind of changes are being made or are they being left out of this this process. If those are good questions both of them when you talk about that you know what we mean by Islamic politics. You know Democratic politics I think if there's a vast amount of change going on in the Middle East right now you point out some examples behind Syria Jordan. No question about that. My sense was that when we talk about how political Islam is changing how it's interacting differently with with the government it's more I think it's more on the level beneath the actual taking power and I think that's a key

point I think in the past the Muslim Brotherhood being a great example movement sought to overthrow the government they were going to institute their vision of a new of a society and that was going to be an Islamic society it was going to be change from above. What I was struck by you know in my time as a journalist there was change from below. And I think a lot of these movements are kind of disavowed this idea of we're going. These towers were going inside our vision and instead they were seeking to like to bring about grassroots change. Soon a change that took place from below that was much more gradual and I think a lot more effective and a lot of instances and let me just use the Muslim Brotherhood as an example because this was probably the first and by far the largest Islamic fundamentalist group you know formed in the 1930s and it's enjoyed a prominent role in Egypt and other Arab countries since then. Today it's undergoing serious changes I mean sweeping changes both within the group. I think it's opening itself up to more dissent and criticism but also in the way it's interacting outside with with groups other groups in society both secular and religious. And I think that's a key point they're willing to make

coalitions they're willing to enter into and to elections. They're willing to compromise on their positions. They're basically becoming an actor in a pluralist landscape and I think that's a stunning change from what we saw even 10 15 years ago. And I think it's happening elsewhere his bill on Lebanon for instance entering into elections participating in much as you know debates in the legislature compromising its you know what positions might alienate other people. Jordan another example of this turkey is another example so I think we're seeing these groups start to say that we don't have one vision of this on that must be instituted. The rhetoric accepting the fact there might be many Islams and that we can compromise and negotiate over what that Islam means in terms of their own program and in terms of the greater society you know the society at large they're saying that we don't have a right to you know institute our program at the expense of all other programs. And I think that's a huge you know hugely important change and one it's still only it's still nice in the lot of ways but I think it does. If it does have a chance to flourish it could it could speak to a different region in its entirety.

So you think that they are building more tolerance for so-called different brands of the two like the Taliban who had that its notion and Aracely contends that that's the only way to go. Exactly I mean I think that's when we see that we've seen the failures of that I mean Sudan and Iran being the best examples of that I mean here is in the past that's been the blueprint to change revolution. You know what happened in Iran in Iran in Sudan are it's hard to even compare them but both both countries had an experience in which revolution are crude a Taube brought an Islamic vision to power it was a totalitarian vision it was. It prided itself in saying that we are the one vision of Islam that must be instituted and at the expense of all other visions and I think it's been a disaster in both those countries and I think Iran might change to the degree where it's viable down the road but Sudan's already failed obviously I mean the architect of the program is in jail now in Sudan I mean it's a filter that degraded you know what about if these groups like the Muslim Brotherhood have been around since 1928. If they become. You know it's sort of making coalitions in a pod and you know the

system then does that just make other people say well they're found out they're not pure and you know bring about other groups. You know I haven't seen that and obviously there's a potential for that I didn't come across that at all I there. Now that doesn't mean I don't want to say that there's not strong divisions over the staff I mean what happened with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt in the 90s almost wrecked the organization over which direction we're going to go with this and it's been I think for a lot of members were very alienated by that. I haven't seen this kind of reaction where you are sellouts and now you know we're going to go back to the warpath I haven't seen that at all. But but there is always a potential for that I don't think this is going to be a smooth transition by any means I think it's going be very troubled and I think a lot of governments haven't embraced it yet either. I think a lot of governments very suspicious about this direction and they still think I mean Egypt is a great example I think the Egyptian government still says. These guys don't want power. We need to be careful for them a win will be you know what throw them in jail. You know whenever we see a threat. OK well speaking of women then perhaps you know women got more education during

nationalism and certain rights in the workplace but at the same time they didn't necessarily have as many changes in like personal status laws divorce and things of that nature travel without permission from husband etc. and then in the you know then they became the Islamic period. And and you think that there's some move out of that or some change. So what do you see as the position for women under that it's kind of a new outlook. Well I you know in terms of what you know we're tired of the village it's such a politicized issue and so much of I think it's a lot harder issue in the West than it is in the Muslim world but it definitely is one of those flashpoints. You know and so you know an understanding that was a flashpoint I did try to 10 people down you know activists that I was talking to were you know how to go how do I stand on this. They often would support the veil there's no question about it. Yeah I'd like to go beyond the veil that write something on the outside but but other issues about women's power ation I mean what I was struck by at least in the movement that I came across Turkey Egypt Iran even thought it was there was a movement but what's happening in Iran is

is an incredible degree of activism on the part of women in Iran is a great example of changing personal status law. There have been some changes obviously I mean Iran is nothing like you know Saudi Arabia for instance but even in the Gulf you're seeing women take a much more assertive role in trying to bring about changes again on grass roots. And a gradual level across the board I so want to participate in these movements to the point where the movement would pride themselves on the level of women's participation and I don't want to argue that the role of women over in the Middle East or the Muslim world is the same as it is in the United States there's no question it's not but but if anything I was struck more by the fact that they were taking an aggressive role taking an assertive role rather than the opposite that they were being you know oppressed and you know what that first struck me much more than the latter. Right well we never expected to be the same as in the States because the whole structure is different but I was just wondering if there was any kind of movement in in kind of structures which I guess you're saying that at least people groups are priding themselves on women's participation. Although I was wondering if that was true participation or

maybe they like to have the appearance of you know. Well I think it's I think there's a little of both. You know no question I mean the women that I met and I tell when I was I was definitely impressed by the end both in their commitment to the what they were trying to do and also and the power they're exercising within the movement. It's still a male dominated movement. There's no question about that I don't I don't think. I think there's a long way to go but I think I guess again my point is just that. What I'm getting at is that it's almost counterintuitive I mean to me what I would have expected was very little participation but in fact what I found was a lot of participation I guess that that's what struck me most in dealing with that and women being able to get some of this power by saying Well back in in the 7th century women were actually very vocal and I mean are they able to I think doing any kind of reinterpretation of the earlier period or are they. I mean is it only like if Lambesis women or is it women in general that you feel becoming more active.

Well I think you know I think it's an interesting point because I think what drives that is that you know to me political Islam is anything but but a retrograde movement I mean there with the movement itself very much you know positioned itself as a modern movement that we have a modern vision for a life that we draw on our cultural traditions and history but we're going to create a modern alternative something that can compete with the you know the West and a lot of ways. And I think women's role as a physician within that vision it's not you know we're going to go back to you know 200 300 years ago but in fact we're going to find out how you can be a modern Muslim woman. And that often means educated that often means politically active that often means assertive and I think that's the way that you know it's being positioned that way. There is some interpretation going on but I think more it's it's the struggle to define what a modern what role a modern Muslim woman has both in the movement and then in society at large. OK well thank you very much. Thanks for the CO. We're about at a midpoint here. Our guest is Anthony should be he's. Correspondent for the washing course money for the Boston Globe in Washington for the Boston Globe newspaper. Before that he worked for the Associated Press. He

was a news editor at The Los Angeles bureau and before that was Cairo correspondent for the AP. He's the author of a book titled Legacy of the Prophet despots Democrats and the New Politics of Islam. It is published by Westview press. It's in bookstores now if you want to look at it questions are also welcome. Three three three. W. Weil toll free 800 1:58 W. while just for a second to return to a matter that you touched on and I think I'm sure that some of the people involved in these movements those that have taken up an armed struggle would say that they were forced into doing it because the governments of their countries many of them decidedly undemocratic saw these movements as a threat and very aggressively moved to crush them before the. It could gain strength and I'm sure that there would've been a sigh when these groups have said well yeah it'd be swell if we could compete in an open election but the government won't let us. Great point. You know and I think that's you know we often are we haven't focused in key in on on the violence

committed by Islamic groups in opposition and there is there's been a lot of violence no question about it. But these governments you know in Egypt for instance I keep going back to Egypt as Egypt is so important in the Middle East but you know Egypt gives very little room for dissent within society and and I think it has to share the blame for that for the violence that was carried out over the past 20 or 30 years. It struck me one of my last it was actually the last visit to Cairo I met a guy named come out I believe and he was a deputy leader of the group that carried out the assassination of Anwar Sadat gypsum president in 1981 and he was put in jail for 10 years. He was only I was not executed just because his role wasn't you know he wasn't actually directly involved in the assassination. But I interviewed him in 1909. And he was any was remarkable because he was trying to create a new political group a political party actually and take part in you know the politics of the society around him. And this is it was a remarkable change and here's a man who was put in jail because he tried to you know help plan the assassination of the

Egyptian president today trying to form a political party. And he made that very point that you were just saying that you know back then we were young. There was the government was not going to give us any chance to you know to operate politically there was no chance for change except to take up arms and you know what do you do you agree with that or disagree with that that was definitely a perception at the time there's some truth to it in terms of the level of government repression. Now he sees a different you know crime and he also thinks the violence hurt the movement. It was wrong. You know it's smear the reputation of Islam and so he's you know there's other reasons that he you know he had it had changed but. But it does go back to that idea that there was very little room for maneuver. You know 20 30 years ago let's take another caller. This is champagne County wine to you. Morning gentlemen and I'll have to bring up these two points and then let's you talk about him and now won't be able to engage in any repartee after go but one domestic thing I'd like you to treat and I think it's since you're in Washington you're probably watching this but could you comment on our

Reverend Falwell's remark about there will be out the door with regard to Muslim groups applying for the faith based funding. And I think he said some other things too that I actually haven't read the first article or the actual transcript on Beliefnet. I think he's actually saying things that other people are thinking so and people are distancing themselves from what he's saying but I think the image of Islam is the terrorists to so ponder and that if we were left with that and the other thing is in the occupied territories and Israel and before Israel existed even the British were doing the same thing that they did in India and they did as a colonial power divide and conquer and unplayed religious forces against secular forces play the mosque and see each other. We have on the record that before PLO was recognized as somebody to talk to which is less now than ever again. But

I. This is really government under schmear I think was funding Hamas as a counterbalance to to the secularists and the PLO supporters so it's a it's a complicated web and not like for you to explain that it's something that isn't treated often in the press here and I don't have to hang up and let you sort those out. Thanks a lot. Okay thanks for the call. You know I haven't read that the transfer to follow up comments that you know other people have talked to me about them I find it shocking really. And you know you know the caller may be right that that as a certain there is a certain feeling among a lot of Americans about Muslim groups that I just you know I find it hard not to see that as something so chauvinist or so racist that it would be acceptable for used for any other group in society again. I'm not a Muslim. You know I come from a Christian family. But I when I when I hear we're talking about follows comments I just got the idea it might refer to Jewish groups or Christian groups that way it would be unacceptable. The very bottom line to be acceptable and

the criticism that would result would be awesome I think. And I don't do any different standard that we should hold a Muslim groups and it you know does strike me coming back. Like I said after five years away you kind of lose a little bit of respect of him and I have come back and I think there is a. Almost a part of the American psyche that has not a revulsion maybe but a very deep suspicion of Islam of political Islam of Muslim groups. And I and I think we as journalists share a certain responsibility for that that our coverage in the way we framed the events going on abroad have contributed to that. And by Noam I mean and again I want to I don't want to make that you know I don't want to suggest that there isn't terrorism commit in the name of Islam there is I think we do caution that we don't over generalize and try to you know use that as a as a broad brush across the entire faith religion I mean you know a billion people. He brings up a point about him and that's a great point and actually it's in the book. And I talk about Israeli government support for Hamas in the 80s when when the PLO or the Palestinian national movement was seen as a much bigger threat to the Israeli government. And I think it's something you see time and again when

you know movements that aren't that are seem to compete with the bigger threat are funded or helped or supported. And here's a good example of that worse mess was helped by the Israelis and it served you know it backfired really bad obviously in the 1990s. Well after all the United States supported the mujahedeen in Afghanistan. And when the Soviets were occupying because that was the Cold War the Soviets were enemies so the enemies of our enemy are our friends. That's the way the things go and now look at the people that seem to be most problematic here for the United States. They're the those people who fought against the Russians in Afghanistan or a lot of people who went there got their training and then they went elsewhere. That's right that's a great many I mean and you know and nobody I mean back in the 1980s when you read that the press coverage when you talk to journalists who dealt with that when you talk to even like you know diplomats and officials who who were involved in that image with the Mujahideen nobody predicted what would happen and you're right I mean the people who were responsible for acts of violence against United States right now are almost drawn

exclusively from that group supported by the CIA to fight in Afghanistan in the 1980s almost exclusively I mean it is remarkable that they were trained supported and backed by U.S. money and now they're you know they're about enemies of the United States. It is remarkable. Maybe I should ask you to talk about some place. Give us any we've talk about this trend this move away from militancy toward democracy toward a kind of posture that says revolution really needs instead of coming from the top down. It's. I'm going to come from the ground up and people who are working in a grassroots political sort of way give some good example that would show how that can work. Let me tell you the best example and I keep on going back to Lebanon but I think it's one that probably a lot of listeners are familiar with. Lebanon was was gripped by a civil war that lasted 15 years 1975 to 1990 it was you know I mean the name back in the 1990s I ought to remember just almost signified or suggested Anarky. I mean it was a it was a rough place back

then Hizbullah and Islamic movement you know supported by Iran actually you know it was kind of created by Iran and a lot of ways in 1902 after the Israeli invasion Rose in that environment in an arctic environment and it like I said it carried out these acts of terrorism in the 1980s and 1990s that it shifted its focus to fighting the Israeli occupation and sort of mother not at the same time it used these resources from Iran and its own resources to create this just vast network of social institutions hospitals dental clinics pharmacies schools nurseries I mean the list goes on it's it is a remarkable a ray of institutions meant to help people and help people and the absence of any government help from the Lebanese government just you know it was Iraq after the Civil War obviously they couldn't do the same things. And that's what I say when we if you ask a Lebanese you know ask most Lebanese especially in the south what what has the lotto say well it's it's the group that operates that hospital around the corner it script operates the school that my kid goes to or it's the you know it's the movement that that is open to pharmacy

regen my drugs in and I think that association with has belies a social movement is a powerful one and it's one it's to that's given the group a remarkable degree of support and one of that's key that it is used in elections I mean has the law has less than a dozen but it has you know several members in parliament too who work with leftist groups you know trying to you know put issues of labor foot issues of you know of workers of people suffering under the economic conditions there to the forefront I mean and that in itself is kind interesting that it's able to create those coalitions but it's a group that operates as a political and social movement. Now I think a lot of people united states and the U.S. government obviously still considers it a terrorist group and I think sometime down the road the U.S. government going to re-assess say well Hizbollah was involved in terrorism. There's no question about that I mean the group denies it but there's really little question that it was was not involved in terrorism. It's a change movement today. It speaks to a large portion of the Lebanese population. It's effective. It operates political and socially and I mean it. If the question becomes do we do we

reassess our policy in our position toward this movement. And that's I think that's really the question we're going to be facing five or 10 years down the road do we do we considered looking these groups in the in the context of what happened 20 years ago or do we start trying to encourage their participation in a society as a as an operative as an actor in a pluralist framework and encourage that you know in the for the sake of better democracy or more just system and those countries like to have you talk about Iran. Here is a country where the relationship between Iran and United States is certainly problematic. And as as our relationships between the United States and other countries in the region but here this seems to be a case where enough people in this country. Who are involved in the foreign policy establishment continue to talk about. To raise the question Are there things that we can do to improve this relationship and it's still very difficult although some people hold out I think hope for the fact that within Iran there seems to be a great debate and wrestling

between people who are more conservative and people who are less conservative although maybe by our standards less conservative was still be pretty conservative. Is that how is this going and what is the possibility that we might see a more moderate kind of government in Iran and one where we where the United States could have a constructive relationship with them. Iran is a it's a fascinating place this is. The Sudan is my favorite place to to travel to as a reporter. There's there so much going on in Iran and it's you know I mean first you know obviously Iran is a country of you know protecting culture and history there's no question about that but even in terms of what's happening today it's there's so much energy. There's so much you know so much activity going on about trying to define what is society going to be in Iran and you know down the road or can we have an Islamic democracy basically is the question being asked and I think you're right there's I mean it's I think it's too early to say which direction it is going to go might. My gut sense is that that present house to me is going to succeed in the certain level and he is going to be able to bring about I mean his kids

campaign is for the rule of law rather than the rule of revolution. You know the revolution everything nothing was for sure you could be thrown in jail the next day. He's trying to create a society in which law is supreme and that you know it's a battle that's not won by any means yet he's coming. There's an election coming up again and you know whether he wins or not I think it's going to have a lot to say about whether his reforms succeed and I think you're right I think United States government is starting to sense that Iran is no longer this monolithic you know symbol of Islamic militancy. I mean that we are starting to see nuances and you know diversity of opinions and an attempt to reform. It's a tough position for the United States to be in because if we overly support then I think it could almost work against the reformers in Iran. You know there still is a lot of a stigma to be too closely associated with the United States in Iran so it almost backfired It's a tricky you know it's a tricky policy for them I think for the U.S. government to negotiate I think they've actually done decently well I think you know getting rid of all the sanctions is probably is probably going to be better because you know economic conditions are such an important issue but I think we're seeing you know our policy reassess

toward Iran much more than we're seeing it recessed toward other countries and groups in the Middle East. Well it seems that one of the hurdles that we have to get over that we that is the United States government has to get over is what we've done in the past and unfortunately it seems to be the case that when it comes to foreign policy Americans have pretty short memories. But places other elsewhere around the world their memories are are much longer and you don't have to go back that for example in Iran you don't have to go back that far to look at how the United States was involved in the installation of the Shah. That's that's that's not very very long ago and certainly Iranians members remember that if Americans don't and you know that the West not just the United States but other but the British and. Others in Europe were certainly involved in the region in the Middle East going back well certainly before World War 2 maybe even before World War 1 when they they were playing the great the

great game and going in there and creating countries and drawing borders and carving out what bits of influence they could that the people there remembered that very well. And it's going to continue to be a problem probably for the foreseeable future. That's a great point. You know I think every American I'm sure remembers you know the taking of the hostages at the U.S. embassy in Tehran no question as we should. It was an important event and you know in modern history. At the same time I think very few Americans would remember that you know the U.S. government's role in overthrowing most the deck of the Iranian nationals Prime Minister I think in 1953. It's not you know I probably most people I don't know most of DEC's name everybody knows about it. It's it is. Out of Iran and Iran you know national memory and its incredibly decisive point I think you're right I mean there's there's this misunderstanding that goes on both sides. And and I think we do have to appreciate that just by our sheer power economic social military we exercise an incredible degree of influence over the rest of the world and the world is very sensitive to that fact I think that goes beyond the Muslim world to be honest.

We have about seven or eight minutes left in this part of focus 580 I should introduce Again our guest Anthony Shadid works for The Boston Globe. He's a Washington correspondent for that newspaper. Before that he worked for the Associated Press was news editor in The Los Angeles bureau and before that was Cairo correspondent for The Associated Press he's been a number of years reporting on the Middle East and to put some of what he learned into this book that I mentioned legacy of the prophet the publisher is Westview press and questions are welcome 3 3 3 9 4 5 5 that's for Champaign-Urbana folks. But no matter where you're listening it would be a long distance call 800 to 2 2 9 4 5 5. I think in the press coverage of people who are involved in violent political action there is that we have this notion that there are connections between people who operate in different places or maybe the case is that there's a lot of movement of people anywhere at any rate. There is this notion that we have that they are networked. Is there also now. Networking going on with the kind of people who

are working in this other way. And are they making contacts with one another talking about the fact here we're doing this and you're doing this over here and establishing some sort of ties that go across borders. That's interesting I mean there I think there is a an awareness problem more than a practical networking going on in prisons present how to meet Iran what he's saying and what he's doing has had an effect on the Arab world and you know Iran is a country that speaks a different language Farsi. It practices a different sect of Islam to most of the Arab world. But at the same time what President has me is saying is so is so universal in so many respects that a member activist in Egypt would say wow you know what he said was that's that's what we're talking about that's the direction we want to go so I think it's probably more a sense of people listening and learning rather than actively engage with each other and that's you know. There's a whole host of reasons for that politics difficult for Islamic activists to travel a lot of countries because they're you know they're under suspicion. There's language of course this culture these types of things so I think there is an awareness across borders probably more

than that a practical day to day interaction. The what seems to be one of the things seems to make really difficult sometimes talking between again acknowledging that this is a vast sort of overstatement talking about the the Islamic world and the West as if these were two you know a solid identifiable things. But having said that what seems sometimes to make that conversation difficult is the tendency it seems on the Muslim side of identifying themselves almost in opposition to the West by saying one of the ways we talk about who we are is by saying we are not them. And that seems to be so much conflict around issues of values that it seems difficult sometimes to to talk to find any sort of a common ground to have a conversation. I think that's right I think you know it's almost negative identity we are not and therefore we're this you know

I think that there's a there's definitely a certain truth of that I you know my my sense of it is that it is that there is a sense of being so overwhelmed of so under siege that it's hard to break out of that and and all that but even then you know I think you're saying you know people identify them so. Peace of the the West I think there's a certain there's definite truth that there's also truth the fact there's an incredible appreciation for the West and that's why this understanding the West is so you know so tied up in so many conflicting emotions I mean there is you know the overwhelming majority of Muslims admire the West for its military and economic prowess I mean it is the single most powerful you know again you're right I mean we can't just say it's one thing but you know if the countries that make up the west are the most powerful and the most common in the world there's an appreciation and almost an envy of that then that's mixed up with this this threat that they sense in Western culture you know that it is going to overwhelm us it's going to make us no longer Muslims because we're going to you know adopt their you know their their manners their their outlook their perspectives. So it's a tough one and I think you know I think you're right there is a there's an overgeneralization on both parts on

both the West and the Muslim world. But often it's tied up in almost this you know this kind of love hate relationship as well you know. Well that's it seems that at that other times and other places around the world people have looked at Western culture and have asked this question Is it possible for us to adopt the positive things and not the negative things and maintain the essence of our culture and yet use whatever the West has to offer in a positive way and sometimes it it sounds as if. Within the Islamic politics people are saying the west has nothing positive to offer and that there is no way that we can take anything because anything that we might take from the West is somehow polluted. And if we bring that into our into our home so to speak then we open the door that we may not be able to get closed again. And that's and I don't think you hear that much anymore that was definite. That's like even democracy we can't import democracy because democracy is Western You would hear that a while ago I don't. I really really ran

across that today it was more democracy is good let's interpret it you know in our own terms. And it's interesting when you make that point because when I was doing research on the book and I ran across references to how Chinese and Japanese intellectuals are facing the same issue how do we borrow the West's technological prowess but leave this culture behind it was the same debate that I was hearing in a lot of countries in the Muslim world how can we take one thing but leave the other. And that's it. That's an ongoing debate and I think there's a certain energy that comes out of that search. You know a certain flexibility and vibrancy that you know how do we define the stuff on our own terms. You know not that we disavow everything that is Western but instead look at it you know appreciate it understand it and to try to adapt it to what our needs and our our challenges are. Yeah. Well just we're at the point where Britain pretty much has to have to finish and maybe I'll just ask this in a so often a conversation like this. We hear from our perspective say how are these people going to change themselves so we can have a better relationship and we should at least be spending some time saying all right now how are

we going to change the way that we think so that we and they can have a better relationship. You know I see it as it's a long process. I really like I've said I think there is a certain part of American psyche that's very specialist of. The Muslim world of Muslim countries and political Islam and I think it's going to be a long process. I think just you know the more that we're open minded in our time you know accepting of the changes that are going on and trying to you know better understand better appreciate those changes. That's a huge first step and if that happens I think you know I think there is hope down the road. Well I want to thank you very much for spending some time and talking with us we appreciate it. Thank you. Our guest Anthony Shadid he is as I mentioned the Washington correspondent for The Boston Globe newspaper and if you'd like to read his book again it's titled Legacy of the prophet. And it is published by West you press. Today's broadcast is made possible with support from BMW photo Chorley photography providing portrait wedding and commercial photography services and portrait framing photo is located in downtown Champaign at 1:18 West walnut 3 5 1 6 2 2

2. Tomorrow morning on the show we'll be doing our regular monthly program on personal finance usually we do the shows with David sent from strategic Capital Bank and Trust and he's not able to be with us this month that we've got an able substitute Kevin WASPy will be here he's a lecturer in finance at University of Illinois and will try to do the same kind of program. If you have questions about your investment strategies you can call and then in the second part of the program we will be speaking with Michael Branson. He's professor of curatorial studies at Bard College and we'll be talking about the visual artist in America. He's written a book on this titled visionaries and outcasts that among other things looks at the.