Feelings of US invasion of Iraq hang in the air throughout the Muslim world By Paul-Marie de La Gorce

Aljazeerah Info Center needs your support

Send donations by check to: Al-Jazeerah Info Center, P.O. Box 724, Dalton, GA 30722-0724, USA.

From Dubai to Tunis, and throughout most of the Muslim-Arab world, one finds that, under the shock of the recent war against Iraq and its dramatic consequences, a debate about the future of the region is taking place in the shape of conferences, seminars and meetings amongst intellectuals, journalists, lawyers and politicians.

For those who have actually been there and taken part in these interactions, there can be no doubt that in all the countries a groundswell of public opinion is emerging.

Let's examine this more closely. In this part of the world, there is an extraordinarily strong feeling that the region is facing aggression, an attempt at domination and foreign occupation, which has already begun and has a potential for expansion – all of which is unbearably humiliating.

To ignore these feelings would be to turn a blind eye to a blatant reality in this politically, economically and strategically vital region, whose importance is crucial and which is home to more than 300 million people. The fact is that these feelings, which range from bitterness to indignation, anger and fury, are focused on the power of the US and in the manner in which it is exerted in this part of the world.

Are these feelings widespread? Those whose voices are being heard are, in every respect, representatives of the middle classes and come quite often from well-off backgrounds. They are also amongst the most educated and therefore the most aware of the outside world.

But everything would tend to suggest that they are, right now, merely reflecting the general feeling. Indications are that public opinion is strongly rebelling against the fate of the Muslim-Arab world and against the humiliation and oppression of which it feels itself to be the victim.

Therefore, it can undoubtedly be concluded that what is being expressed in all the sections of the society is in fact a reflection of the general state of mind at all levels. There is no doubt that this year the war has brought to a head the vehemence of comments and the violence of people's feelings.

Many things helped to bring this about: the absence of any legal justification for the US-led war against Iraq; the blatant lies about the non-existent links between Iraq and the perpetrators of the September 11, 2001, attacks; the threat presented by the Iraqi army which was obviously too weakened for this to be credible; the existence of weapons of mass destruction, which nobody has been able to prove, either before or after the war.

At the end of the hostilities, other things also conspired to bring this about: the destruction of the Iraqi administrative institutions, universities, hospitals and, partially, the museums, which the US authorities could have easily prevented.

Add to this the relentless spiral of clashes between the Resistance and its repression, including the brutal methods employed. We can also add the rather nauseating scenes that were freely shown to the whole world, following Saddam Hussain's capture. These images have had such an effect that the ex-president's faults and extortions - and the unpopularity thus incurred - seem to have been all but forgotten.

In the current debate, little space has been allotted to possible ways of taking up the challenges presented by oppression, occupation and humiliation.

But, as of now, we must state that those who are leading the present debate and who are, in essence, the social and intellectual avant-garde in these countries, have to confront two dangers.

Either one of these could have severe consequences, not only for the elite, the professionals and ruling classes, but also for the masses.

The fact is that in the Muslim-Arab world, a trend has developed, which in the west has come to be known as "Islamic", but should rather be termed fundamentalism.

This stems from scorned nationalism, from social demands too often ignored or rejected, from an unbalanced society and from the frequent failure of economic experiments, whether socialist or capitalist, which were tried after de-colonisation.

This trend is fanatic and even xenophobic, but above all it is obscurantist and driven by its own internal logic.

For the élite, the managerial and ruling classes, to identify themselves with this line of thought would be to renounce their own identity.

They would be joining a movement over which they would have no control and, in so doing, would effectively be turning their backs on the modern world, even on future markets.

But to resign themselves to accept the dominionation of a superpower along with the diktats of imperialism and, therefore, submit to occupation and give in to humiliation would be to renounce their social role and cut themselves off irrevocably from their people.

This would place them on the fringes of history and limit them to playing bit parts. To reject obscurantism and to take full responsibility in this new struggle for liberation is, in all events, amongst the hardest tasks presented by contemporary history to this generation.

Paul-Marie de La Gorce is a French writer and journalist on Middle East problems and strategic international affairs.

* This article was translated from the original French by Maritza Léger for Gulf News