Learning From the Enemy
Dr. Mohammad T. Al-Rasheed,
comments@d-corner.com
Contrary to common belief, the greatness of a nation is not achieved or measured by the nation’s ‘great’ men but by the nation’s great laws. Men die; the law survives.
Roman law survived the good, the bad and the ugly among Roman emperors. Napoleon’s ‘great’ achievements were wiped out soon after Waterloo, but the Napoleonic code still survives in one form or another in places as far away culturally from France as Egypt.
America’s founding fathers created a set of laws known as the Constitution. The likes of Jefferson and Franklin, to name but two, were brilliant individuals. Some fathered more than just a country but their legacy is far more important than personal shenanigans and false glory. They conceived, wrote and put into practice a system of laws that protects a newly arrived Albanian immigrant who does not speak English in the same way it protects a Kennedy.
We in the Arab world have misread this concept and failed to achieve ‘greatness’ in any form because we still tie our lot to individuals.
Iraq today is known primarily for Saddam Hussein rather than for Hammurabi, the first legislator in the world who predates the Old Testament. We still look fondly upon the memory of Egypt’s Nasser simply because he knew how to talk loudly. He was an authoritarian, led the Arabs into the most disastrous war in their history in 1967 and introduced socialism without understanding its concepts.
To put it bluntly, we have to understand that the institution is more important than the man who dwells in its lofty halls or controls its powerful mechanisms.
If we don’t, we can expect another thousand years of the same fate. Institutions are not built around individuals. Rather, individuals are produced by institutions. If my fellow Arabs understood this concept, they would have no problem understanding how Jefferson who kept slaves and fathered children from some of them, and Lincoln, who fought a civil war to abolish slavery, are revered equally.
Shimon Peres, known as the father of the Israeli nuclear program, (he used to call the Dimona project a textile factory) is today an elderly Israeli statesman in the opposition. There is hardly any personal glory in what he achieved for his country. Saddam on the other hand, and others on the North African coast, went after the same programs for personal protection and personal gain.
When Peres dies, a statue for him will probably be put up in his hometown whereas Saddam’s was toppled in full view of the world. That is the difference. Peres worked within the law of his land while Saddam worked within a law unto himself. American support for Israel is a small part of the story while Israel’s respect for itself is the whole story.
American support did nothing for the Shah. Doesn’t anyone wonder about the discrepancy? I’ll tell you why: the Shah ruled from a throne and Israel is ruled from a constitution.
There is nothing wrong with learning from your enemy. Saladin and Richard the Lionhearted learned more from each other than they learned from their respective communities.
One won and the other lost but they parted honorable enemies. What can a young Arab learn from Arafat these days? Nothing much — unless you count as worth learning the dysfunctional art of smothering your visitors with unseemly, emphatic, and unwelcome kisses.
