A New Academic fashion in the disciplines of history, anthropology, and cultural criticism is to “foreground” authors in works of scholarship. But it is not in imitation of what is currently fashionable that I have chosen to make my address autobiographical. I am a historian who enjoys writing narrative history and who elsewhere has argued that the narrative remains as valuable and as legitimate in modern scholarship as theory. So here I wish to tell a story that may hold some lessons for those scholars who seek freedom from the constraints imposed both by the norms of Middle Eastern societies and by the rules of the western academy. In our post-modern, post-structural, post-colonial world, all the certitudes have been shaken, and the narrative might well be the only kind of story that we can relate to with any kind of authority.

Among The Wide range of issues analyzed by Arab scholars, there is a significant interest in the political economy of the Middle East. The impact of globalization on national sovereignty is a particularly strong concern, which is addressed in four studies that were published in Beirut in 1997.

When The Jubilee year of the founding of the State of Israel arrived, the market was flooded with books, periodicals, special issues, TV documentaries and albums marking the 50th anniversary. As expected, some of these products stimulated sharp controversies, as a part of recent debates over Israeli historiography, collective memory, and identity. Perhaps the most controversy was focused on the Channel One (public TV) series titled “Tkuma” (“Revival”). Contrary to expectations, the series presented the Israeli past a little bit more courageously and less canonically than the usual conservative Zionist version. It was by no means a “revisionist” history, but for the first time the general public was exposed to a more balanced and less mythical version of Israel’s history. The uprooting and expulsion of the Palestinians during the 1948 war and their transformation into a refugee camp society were briefly mentioned with some empathy. Clips from the well-known Syrian reconstruction of the massacre in Kafr Qassem were aired. In the segment on Palestinian armed struggle use was made of films from the PLO archives (captured by the Israeli secret services during the 1982 invasion of Lebanon). The discrimination and peripheralization of the immigrants from Arab countries and their violent reactions (the Wadi Salib riots and the Black Panthers’ demonstrations) were not blurred. In general, alongside the state’s great economic, cultural, and military achievements, some of the shadows were remembered as well, such as Ben-Gurion’s one-man leadership and Golda Meir’s refusal to make any territorial concessions in exchange for security arrangements (peace?). Even the inevitability of the 1967 and 1973 wars was questioned. The series was heavily attacked and accused of being anti-Zionist, especially by the right-wing establishment. The Minister of Communication, Limor Livnat, who is in charge of public broadcasting, tried to “supervise” the series and especially the segment on the PLO; however, she withdrew when she was accused of censorship.

The Failure to Implement the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres thwarted Kurdish hopes for their own state, but it did not write the Kurds out of history. From Sheikh Said’s rebellion against the Turks in 1925 to the legendary Mulla Mustafa Barzani and his son Massud, Kurds have grabbed the occasional headline and challenged central authorities more or less continually throughout the 20th century. Conversely, and in less chronicled fashion, they have also played powerful roles in consolidating state rule. Only after the Gulf War in 1991, however, did Kurds begin receiving sustained western attention and, in the last three years in particular, a new flood of articles and books by academics and journalists has swelled periodicals and library shelves. The Middle East Studies Association’s annual conferences from 1995 to 1997 all featured panels devoted to Kurds and Kurdish politics; at the MESA conference in San Francisco last December, papers concerning Kurds were also presented on thematic panels dealing with such diverse subjects as nationalism in the Middle East and youth in Turkey.

Since The Early 1980s, a vast literature has developed on Islamism, a phenomenon that can be defined as “the recourse to the vocabulary of Islam, used in the postcolonial period to express within the state, or more often against it, an alternative political program that uses the heritage of the West as a foil, but allows nevertheless the re-appropriation of its principal references”. Its intellectual roots and the socio-economic reasons for its emergence are now examined in detail by scholars. Those studies have also illuminated the diversity of Islamism across the Middle East, thereby de-homogenizing an object too often thought of as monolithic.