Voice of America v. Al Jazeera

[Rex Brynen]

Second, when has academia been in charge of ME policy? And when have we depended on academia to set said policy?

I agree with Tom, and would go a step further: until recently, it was not unusual for the policy and academic community to do their things in almost complete isolation from each other. Folks in the IC box rarely got out of that box to talk to academic experts. People in State and DoD were too busy on daily issues to have the time or inclination to engage scholars working on the region.

The problem was equally severe on the academic side. In the US ME Studies community, distaste for US policy was so great that many scholars were pleased not to be engaged with policy makers. A great many scholars, moreover, have no real sense of how the policy process operates, or how to engage/influence it. Certainly the reward system in university settings places little value in doing so.

Regarding ME issues, this has changed substantially since 9/11, and the interaction is much more extensive. It is still not what it could be (and it will be interesting to see whether the 2008 Middle East Studies Association annual conference, which will be in DC in November, will involve some policy-academic dialogue, or whether it will continue to be almost entirely academics talking to themselves).

Moreover, whether the two sides really know what they can (and can't) get from each other, and how best to do so, is still a bit of an open question. It requires real strategizing to make it work. Also open for question is, as Tom notes, the actual influence of all this on policy.

[Ken White]

I agree with Tom, and would go a step further: until recently, it was not unusual for the policy and academic community to do their things in almost complete isolation from each other. Folks in the IC box rarely got out of that box to talk to academic experts. People in State and DoD were too busy on daily issues to have the time or inclination to engage scholars working on the region.

were educated by those in the academic community. There were and are people in both communities that truly understand the ME and will look under the table to determine what's going on -- my observation has been that too many in both do not do so.

The problem was equally severe on the academic side. In the US ME Studies community, distaste for US policy was so great that many scholars were pleased not to be engaged with policy makers.

Also true and frankly, I'm not sure who that is an indictment of. Perhaps no one. Regardless, it is a significant problem but I also suggest that some nominal academic experts that make public statements fail to convince me that they really understand the subtleties of ME political machinations. Or the depth of that distaste I mentioned...

Will also ackowledge the politeness that pervades the ME and the zahir / batin phenomenon can be confusing...

I agree with most of the rest of your comment.

...Also open for question is, as Tom notes, the actual influence of all this on policy.

True but I submit the evidence in the public domain is that the actual influence of those to whom I apply the tag in the Intel and Foreign Policy communities while not totally pervasive is indicative of enough influence -- and enough misreading no matter how well intentioned -- to have caused more than one of our many miscues in the region.

That said, it an exceedingly difficult cultural divide to transcend and I fully understand that. That applies to both the Western - ME divide and the Academy - Policy divide...

[John T. Fishel]

so much credit - or blame. I don't know how many times my former students have disappointed me by doing things that I thought I had showed them had backfired in the past. On the other hand, I've talked with other former students - who did things things that followed logically from my courses - only to find that they had other reasons of their own for doing them!

Cheers

JohnT

[Ken White]

People are seeing an attack where none was intended -- or made.

Your point is acknowledged -- more than and I can sure empathize; seen the same thing...

It is just my perception that in the realm of ME studies and expertise in the west in general and in the US in particular, there happen to be a surprising number of practitioners who miss many of the undercurrents -- and I also have said that in that area of the world, that is very easy to understand. I am certainly no expert and don't claim to be. However, I have learned that in that part of the world little is as it seems and there are almost always hidden motives and to us westerners, hidden agendas. One 'interprets' the words and actions from there with considerable caution -- and ideally, very, very slowly. Unless one is overfilled with certitude or has an agenda, that is...

I think it's a given that one can lead a student to water but cannot make him drink. There are others that will find the water on their own; still more that can be lead and will drink. Experts in any realm can and do err.

If that realm entails the true understanding and accurate interpretation of a vastly different culture then the number of truly knowledgeable experts in the field from a given sized pool will be far smaller than will that of truly knowledgeable experts in the field from a similar sized pool of say, civil engineers. Engineering is essentially a science with firm rules.

Interpreting the intent of humans, particularly humans who do not think like you do, is like warfare, it isn't a science -- it's an art. All the education in the world will not help those who aren't artists.