Orientalism Rules, OK?

I would like to sound the death knell for Orientalism, the Western practice of studying the Islamic world, then defining it in our terms as the ‘barbarous Other’, before setting about dominating it, on the grounds that this is in the Islamic world’s best interest. But alas, Orientalism is alive and well. As Edward Said observed, it has been thriving since at least the end of the 18th century, when Napoleon invaded Egypt and brought with him a small army of savants who wrote up Egypt in a vast encyclopaedia, before declaring the total degradation of Oriental culture and society, and therefore Europe’s almost divine right to rule. The British and French contnued to assert their ‘superiority’ over the Middle East for the next century and a half. And when their conviction in this ‘civilising mission’ waned after the Second World War, the Americans took over. Bush’s crusade for democracy in Iraq is just the latest manifestation of Orientalism.

Here in Jordan, where I am now, the British essentially installed the Hashemite monarchy after the First World War, and the current King Abdullah’s father, ‘the plucky little monarch’ King Hussein, was seen as ‘one of us’. In fact, both Hussein and his son had to execute a difficult tight-rope act, staying in the West’s good books while avoiding rubbing up the local population the wrong way. The latter has become increasingly difficult as people here become increasingly impatient with the Orientalist attitudes and behaviour of Washington. One reason I hope Barack Obama wins not just the Democratic nomination in the US, but also the presidential election, is because I hope with his background he might be able to break the mould. But don’t count on it.