|
||||||||||
|
|
Truth About Islam in
Academia? by Cinnamon Stillwell While the Middle East Studies
Association (MESA) has long dominated the field, its highly
politicized leadership's inability to withstand criticism, inattention
to radical Islam, and apologetic approach towards the West's foes has left many
Middle East studies scholars feeling unwelcome by their umbrella professional
organization. Enter the Association for the Study
of the Middle East and Africa (ASMEA). Founded last year by Professors
Bernard Lewis and Fouad Ajami, ASMEA offers an
alternative to MESA's post-colonialist biases and a venue for studying those elements of Islam and the Middle East that
MESA's leaders ignore or downplay. ASMEA's emergence is cause for
optimism. As Franck Salameh, a scholar of the Middle East at Boston College, has written, The complex and richly textured
Middle East deserves far more than the bromides and reductionist commentary
that have of late become the hallmark of some of our day's most influential
scholars in the field. ASMEA promises to provide such critically needed
diversity of perspective. To see how things have
progressed during its first few months of existence, I interviewed ASMEA's
director of public affairs, Patrick Creamer to find out more about the
organization's founding, its inaugural conference in April, 2008, and its future. *** CS: Why was ASMEA founded? Creamer: ASMEA was formed as a response to the mounting interest
in these increasingly inter-related fields, and the absence of any single group
addressing them in a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary fashion. The Association
also seeks to fill a second void caused by the absence of free inquiry and
honest scholastic debate on research pertaining to Middle East studies and
African studies within academia. CS: ASMEA president and professor of political science at
California State University at San Bernardino, Mark T. Clark, told Inside Higher Education that ASMEA's founders wanted an
association "that would be more independent and reflect the academic
community more than interest groups." Can you elaborate on that? Creamer: ASMEA's goal is to be the academic association of choice
for scholars with an interest in the Middle East and Africa. We intend to
achieve this goal by offering superior services and encouraging a robust
exchange of ideas amongst members—principles which are often shunned in other
circles. Free inquiry, greater mix of perspectives, and a desire to learn about
the entirety of the Middle East and Africa, and not just issues and viewpoints
dictated by a few, are among the ways ASMEA seeks to build the bedrock for the
next generation of scholars and teachers. CS: Was ASMEA meant to be an alternative to MESA and if so,
what are the problems with MESA that led to its founding? Creamer: There is a feeling among many who study the Middle East
and issues concerning the region that there was not a truly open academic
society for them to participate in prior to the creation of ASMEA. As ASMEA Chairman
Bernard Lewis said during his keynote speech at the inaugural conference,
Middle East studies are "beset by difficulties." During Professor
Lewis's keynote, he cited "the clash of disciplines and lack of mutual
recognition between them," as well as "the deadly hand of political
correctness," as the major difficulties facing those who participate in
Middle East studies. To that end, Professor Lewis concluded his keynote by
saying, "I hope this organization will make a significant contribution to
changing that." That is certainly a founding goal of ASMEA. CS: Scholars who are loyal to MESA argue that ASMEA has its
own biases. For instance, Bassam Haddad, director of the Middle East Studies
Program at George Mason University, accused
ASMEA of being "a response, rather than an organic expression of a desire
to learn." University of Michigan history
professor Juan Cole labeled ASMEA "exclusively ideological" and only
"for people on the right." And Laurie A. Brand, professor
of international relations at the University of Southern California and the
head of MESA's academic freedom committee, accused ASMEA's leadership of being "at the forefront
of the neoconservative support group for the new administration" and of
having its own "political agenda." What is your response to these
accusations? Creamer: I am not going to respond point by point to their
accusations. A quick scan of each of these individual's writings will show that
they are not shy about spreading their ideological viewpoints. That said, it is
important to note that ASMEA—to use Professor Haddad's interesting choice of
words—was born out of an "organic expression of a desire to learn" in
the truest sense. This Association blossomed because many in the academic
community felt the status quo quashed their efforts to engage in the
discussion. Scholars want a true academic association where all ideas are
discussed and research is judged on its merits, not whether it passes the
litmus test of the status quo. CS: How is ASMEA funded? Creamer: We are a non-profit organization which receives revenue
from members along with a network of private foundations. CS: In comments posted at the Middle
East Strategy at Harvard website, Middle East studies scholars Philip Carl
Salzman and Raymond Ibrahim had nothing but praise for ASMEA's April, 2008 inaugural conference. Ibrahim described it as "a
breath of fresh air," while Salzman noted that the "‘postcolonial'
approach so prevalent in MESA, blaming all problems of the Middle East on the
West, was not much in evidence" and that "many of the difficult
issues of contemporary conflict were tackled head-on in ASMEA conference
papers." How do you think the conference went? Creamer: The feedback we received from the conference from
presenters and attendees alike has been overwhelmingly positive. We are looking
forward to, and laying the groundwork for, our second annual conference to be
held in 2009, as well as looking at some ideas for smaller regional conferences
in the future to build off the successes of our inaugural conference. CS: Critics have pointed to the alleged preponderance of
representatives from military and national security-related think tanks and
organizations as reason to question ASMEA's appeal to fellow academics.
Meanwhile, Philip Carl Salzman called
this "a constructive development" and noted that "we want
academics to be more realistic, and we want agencies, governments, and the
military to be better informed." How do you respond? Creamer: ASMEA's leadership and the general consensus of members
on hand at the conference was that this was a positive benefit of holding our
conference in Washington. By its nature, there is a large military presence as
well as a large think tank population within the Beltway. With their attendance
at our conference, our members had the benefit of sharing their research with
policy-makers, decision-makers, and influence-makers. Most scholars would jump
at that opportunity. The same could be said of the Embassy representatives from
the African and Middle East nations who attended. So we think it is an
additional service we can offer our members. I do want to stress, however, that
the overwhelming percentage of those on hand at ASMEA's inaugural conference
were either professors or students. CS: How does ASMEA approach the study of Islamism/Jihadism/Islamic terrorism? Creamer: Jihadism is certainly a topic that our membership is
extremely interested in and that the Association is not going to shy away from.
Our first conference centered on the profound influence of Islam in Africa and
the Middle East and it sparked many discussions about Jihadism. Over the course
of the two days of the conference, a number of presentations focusing on the
impact of Islam, both in the traditional sense and the modern, more extreme
interpretations, touched on or focused intensely on Jihad. Most of the feedback
we received on the conference's theme and discussions has been positive and
there appears to be a real thirst for scholastic inquiry into this subject
matter that others have traditionally swept aside in academia. CS: What are ASMEA's future plans or goals? Do you see the
organization growing? Creamer: As ASMEA's membership continues to grow, we have big
plans for the future. We hope to hold smaller regional conferences and events
along with our annual conference; our first published journal is set to come
out at the end of the year; and we intend to roll out a new state-of-the-art
website which will allow for a number of new services via the web for our
members. Cinnamon Stillwell is the
Northern California Representative for Campus Watch,
a project of the Middle East Forum. She can be reached at stillwell@meforum.org. |
|||||||||
