The Foreign Service Journal, January 2003

B OOKS 64 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / J A N U A R Y 2 0 0 3 Pointing Out the Contradictions Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism Stephen Zunes, Common Courage Press, 2003, $39.95 hardcover/$18.95 softcover, 264 pages. R EVIEWED BY L AURA E. D E K OCK Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism is a “must- read” for everyone who is tired of the clichéd responses to the post-Sept. 11, 2001 query, “Why do they hate us?” Author Stephen Zunes, an associate professor of politics and chair of the Peace and Justice Studies Program at the University of San Francisco, has woven this set of his essays (most pre- viously published) on U.S. Middle East policy into a seamless and coher- ent volume. Zunes’ central thesis is that America’s Middle East policy stands in direct contradiction to its own rhetoric, and that this disconnect has helped to foster Islamic extremism and anti-Americanism in the Middle East. Among his supporting argu- ments, Zunes contends that the United States has “discouraged the development of greater political plu- ralism and civil society in the Middle East through its support of autocratic regimes and occupying armies.” He also argues that the United States has militarized the region, through both arms sales and direct military inter- vention. Individual chapters discuss U.S. involvement in the Persian Gulf; the Israeli-Palestinian crisis; U.S. poli- cies in Afghanistan, Lebanon and Palestine; and U.S. efforts to combat terrorism. The book concludes with recommendations for how its American readers might act to improve their government’s Middle East policy. Two points made in Tinderbox stand out as particularly significant and bold. One is Zunes’ suggestion that U.S. policy “actually endangers Israel’s legitimate security needs because it gives the Israeli government little out- side incentive to make peace.” In his view, the large, no-strings flows of U.S. aid to Israel have created a cushion that prevents Israel’s own policies, including the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, from becoming politi- cally intolerable to its citizens. The other provocative insight is Zunes’ claim that (contrary to conven- tional wisdom) U.S. policy on the Middle East has been influenced more deeply by the United States’ domestic arms industry than it has been by the Jewish lobby, by Israel’s needs, or even by the oil industry. According to Zunes, U.S. Middle East policy generally and U.S. military aid to regional states, specifically, have subsidized the American arms indus- try. And this behavior has, in effect, shot the United States in the foot, since, “The more weapons and the more sophisticated weaponry the United States has sent to the region, the more threatened the United States and its interests have become.” Regrettably, Tinderbox does have some failings. One of these is its intem- perate criticism of the Mitchell Commission Report and the actions and statements of U.S. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and other tradi- tional conservatives within the current administration. The book also includes an obvious error in logic. Zunes occa- sionally cites polling data in the United States, Israel, and among Muslims or Arabs in support of his views. But at the very close of the volume, he claims that, “Public opinion polling indicating popular support for President Bush’s Middle East policy does not mean that most Americans actually support the policy. It merely means that they sup- port what the policy is presented as being.” Yet he takes great pains throughout the book to convince read- ers that Arabs and Muslims do not accept what the U.S. government tells them at face value. It is regrettable that an author would go to such lengths to break down one stereotype, only to fos- ter a similar one about his own people. But these minor flaws should not deter anyone from reading Tinderbox . Zunes’ fresh perspective truly breaks up the tired discourse on America’s Middle East policy and provides keen Zunes contends that America’s Middle East policy does not match its rhetoric.