A reflection on history’s events often leads to the adage, “Tonight is but a reflection of last night,” bearing a dual meaning. On one hand, it suggests history repeats itself, and on the other, it implies humanity’s inability to learn from the past.
Amin Maalouf, in his book “The Maze of the Lost” (Le Labyrinthe des égarés: L’Occident et ses adversaires), focuses on a pivotal moment in the relationship between the West and its adversaries—the tripartite aggression against Egypt, committed by Britain, France, and Israel. Remarkably, this October 1956 aggression coincided with the Soviet army’s invasion of Hungary and the subsequent casualties among those revolting against the Communist Party and Soviet influence.
Maalouf doesn’t just compare the Soviet attack and the tripartite aggression to today’s concurrent Russian war on Ukraine and the US-Israeli aggression on Gaza. The book predates the latter events. However, he highlights an important consideration for assessing current Western confrontations.
Maalouf clarifies how America intervened to end the tripartite aggression on Egypt, realizing it distracted from Soviet crimes and undermined the West’s image. The US went as far as threatening to withhold an International Monetary Fund loan from Britain if they did not cease fighting and withdraw their military from Egypt.
Maalouf suggests historians view this intervention as a symbol of power shift: colonial powers could no longer intervene in regional conflicts without America’s endorsement.
The situation in Gaza starkly exposes the lack of moral clarity in the US stance, undermining nearly two decades of efforts by the American administration to woo the Arab and Muslim world with what they internally called ‘soft power.’
Reflecting on the mid-20th century and today’s events, one questions whether America’s continued support for Gaza’s violent conflict, with its potential to widen the clash, similarly distracts and tarnishes its image not just in Arab and Islamic territories, but globally.
This leads to another question: Doesn’t America possess the internal strength to discourage such a path, just as it deterred Britain’s aggression on Egypt in 1956?
It appears America hasn’t contemplated this for two reasons: first, the world has moved beyond the Cold War polarization, where one party’s image polished with the detriment to the other. Second, America faces little significant political or military opposition from the Arab and Muslim world. Thus, it believes diplomatic statements and declarations are sufficient to justify its involvement in Gaza as morally and legally sound.
Yet, by engaging unethically and unlawfully in the Gaza conflict, America is arguably opening a new chapter of cultural, value-based, and ethical struggle with the global community, where the first victims are the unarmed Palestinian population—children, women, and the elderly.
Historically, the attack on Gaza will be seen as a moment that revealed the contradictions within the US system for the world to see. Analyzing official US statements on Gaza, one finds a profound degree of disdain for intelligence and people’s wisdom.
Reminders of these statements include assurances that America seeks to prevent the war’s expansion. But what does this mean? Or what is the use of calling for temporary ceasefires for prisoner exchanges, only to resume bombing thereafter? It becomes empty rhetoric when humanitarian aids are suggested for Gaza’s people while their homes are being destroyed.
The current US movements in the Arab region hold great symbolic significance. America’s incapacity to persuade from afar without resorting to force is evident. The events in Gaza have shattered the imperialistic rhetoric that the US has long utilized to gloss over its contradictions. The use of force may enforce America’s viewpoints but fails in the battles of meaning and values now gathering pace against different cultures, particularly Arab and Islamic ones.
In the 1980s, Norman Corwin wrote his renowned book “Trivializing America: The Triumph of Mediocrity,” where he reflects on Thomas Jefferson’s words from two centuries prior, crediting the press alone for all victories of reason and humanity, and laments America’s descent into triviality propagated by media institutions.
Corwin’s work, among others, points to potent indications that the Western democratic system, especially in America, fundamentally relies on undermining intelligence. Such belittlement stems from the cultural trivialization perpetuated by the media.
An example is the establishment of a ‘stardom’ kingdom where truths are sidelined in favor of celebrities’ opinions. Truth becomes what a ‘star’ utters, instead of what reality dictates.
America gambles on the triviality carried by media in Arab and Islamic lands to jump over its cognitive dissonances and mask its ambiguous moral position. The contemporary war is primarily about meaning. Control over social media might tip the scales in America’s favor, but these platforms also expose the contradictions of American democracy in unprecedented ways, fostering a new awareness that yearns for an alternative set of values and civilization.
A social media video recently captured President Biden being interrupted during a church speech by protestors against the Israeli aggression on Gaza, exclaiming for its cessation. After their ejection, the remaining congregants chanted “Four more years!” This episode and similar ones reveal the absurdity and fragility of American democracy, where religion seems to sanctify the killing and displacement in Gaza, blurring the lines between religious and political spheres.
The American response to the Gaza aggression unveils the contradictions of American democracy, which the media seeks to mask with a calculated policy of trivialization—a strategy that packages and sells meaning irrespective of the demands of ethics, law, and humanity. America’s current geographical interests seem to be dictated not by geostrategic considerations but by entrenched religious imperatives.
Thus, we are compelled to ask, “Where are we heading?” The convergence of Israeli and American religious extremism promises to give the Arab-Israeli conflict an exclusively religious and doctrinal nature. This precludes rational thought for resolving the Palestinian issue, portending an era of destructive doctrinal wars.
