April 25, 2007
Rise of Shiites and Implications for the Middle East
Yitzhak Nakash
Associate Professor of Middle East Studies at Brandeis University and Carnegie Corporation Scholar
Minutes of the 29th Meeting of the 65th Year
The 29th meeting of the year occurred on April 25th, 2007, in the Friend Building, beginning at 10:15 AM, when President Joseph Giordmaine opened the meeting and John Marx led the singing of the invocation. Carl Brown read the minutes of the previous meeting.
The death of Ernest Dale was announced and a minute of silence was kept in his memory.
Joseph Bolster, chair of the Nominating Committee, announced the slate of officers to be elected at the next session, which would take place at the Carl Fields Center.
David Dodge introduced the speaker, Yitzhak Nakash, a Carnegie Corporation Scholar, who has a Ph D from Princeton and who has been a visiting lecturer in Near Eastern Studies at the University. He is a specialist is Shiite studies. He has been on "The News Hour" with Jim Lehrer recently. The title of his talk: "Rise of Shiites and Implications for the Middle East."
Professor Nakash began by pointing out that since 1991 Shiites have been moving away from violence as they have been carving out space which had been dominated by Sunni militants in the past. Today Shiites control 80% of the oil in the Gulf region. The Iraq government is Shiite-the largest sect-but each Shiite group is organized differently.
As Iran wants to dominate the region, the question is how to respond to its growing power and desire to influence the whole area? Our speaker expressed belief that the USA could play a positive role if it engaged Iran politically, presently led by a radical populist leader, which could open the door to diplomatic engagement. If Iraq ends up in civil war, Iran will lose out. The USA and Tehran should admit past errors in negotiations between the two. The speaker expressed belief that the controversy over "regime change" would be off the table if the USA tried to build bridges with Iran, which, in turn, would represent a "prospective for peace."
Referring to religious expression in Iraq, the speaker emphasized how clerics influence the situation today, and he pointed out how the Baath party was in control before the --, USA arrived, but now it is the clerics. He expressed hope that a secular middle class would develop in order to offset the power of the clerics who are now in control and who are today's "field commanders."
Continuing to emphasize that with the collapse of the Baath party, the challenge for the USA is how to deal with the religious leaders, the speaker hoped that a unified federated state would develop; that is, if Iraq does not fall into civil war. He expressed hope for representative government, not western style democracy.
Nakash in the final part of his talk reflected on Lebanon and the rise of the Shiites there, as well as its rise elsewhere in the Middle East, which he believes to be a sign of hope. He pointed out that Lebanon is organized by 17 sects following its recent civil war and where Shiites have had a revival, developing into a national group. In the past, they have been in conflict with former governments, but now Shiites are builders of a social and educational agenda.
Concerning Hezbollah's rise into a political power and the military conflict with Israel in2006 (not to be viewed as Islam against the West), Nakash believes that out of the conflict, Hezbollah now has greater power. It has organized Christians and Shiites in the government to develop new power. There, as elsewhere in the Middle East, the USA needs to support political development which may lead to a new balance of power in the region. Emphasizing political rather than military power was a constant theme throughout his lecture.
In response, questions were plentiful: (1) Your reviewer asked Nakash to give a brief --- - description of the difference between Shiite and Sunni. The dispute, he said, goes back to who was to be the successor of Mohammed since he had not named one. Then "cultural dimensions developed." (2) A question about the overall conflict in the Middle East, the speaker spoke of how it was complicated by Shiites supported by Iran and Sunnis supported by Saudis. (3) Concerning detente his response was that it is not achieved overnight, but takes years, adding "Bush needs to plant seeds rather than think he can solve issues!" (4) About Israel, he stated that it is not a key player, rather Iran is, hence the importance of the USA position with Iran. He noted that Shiites were always against Al Qaeda. (5) Regarding withdrawal of the USA from Iraq, he said it should not be immediate (not "cut and run"), adding that "Bush is doing a better job than a year ago." (6) As to religion in Iraq, he stated "No secular Iraq in the future." (7) To a question about Israel and the Palestinians resolving their differences? his response was "Try to do it, but resolve the problems of Iraq and Iran first." To a final question (8) about oil, Nakash stated that USA needs a strategy to secure oil from the Middle East, but "before we leave Iraq," he said, "we need to settle the distribution of oil, for the Kurds and Sunnis and Shiites."
Respectfully submitted,
G. P. Mellick Belshaw
The death of Ernest Dale was announced and a minute of silence was kept in his memory.
Joseph Bolster, chair of the Nominating Committee, announced the slate of officers to be elected at the next session, which would take place at the Carl Fields Center.
David Dodge introduced the speaker, Yitzhak Nakash, a Carnegie Corporation Scholar, who has a Ph D from Princeton and who has been a visiting lecturer in Near Eastern Studies at the University. He is a specialist is Shiite studies. He has been on "The News Hour" with Jim Lehrer recently. The title of his talk: "Rise of Shiites and Implications for the Middle East."
Professor Nakash began by pointing out that since 1991 Shiites have been moving away from violence as they have been carving out space which had been dominated by Sunni militants in the past. Today Shiites control 80% of the oil in the Gulf region. The Iraq government is Shiite-the largest sect-but each Shiite group is organized differently.
As Iran wants to dominate the region, the question is how to respond to its growing power and desire to influence the whole area? Our speaker expressed belief that the USA could play a positive role if it engaged Iran politically, presently led by a radical populist leader, which could open the door to diplomatic engagement. If Iraq ends up in civil war, Iran will lose out. The USA and Tehran should admit past errors in negotiations between the two. The speaker expressed belief that the controversy over "regime change" would be off the table if the USA tried to build bridges with Iran, which, in turn, would represent a "prospective for peace."
Referring to religious expression in Iraq, the speaker emphasized how clerics influence the situation today, and he pointed out how the Baath party was in control before the --, USA arrived, but now it is the clerics. He expressed hope that a secular middle class would develop in order to offset the power of the clerics who are now in control and who are today's "field commanders."
Continuing to emphasize that with the collapse of the Baath party, the challenge for the USA is how to deal with the religious leaders, the speaker hoped that a unified federated state would develop; that is, if Iraq does not fall into civil war. He expressed hope for representative government, not western style democracy.
Nakash in the final part of his talk reflected on Lebanon and the rise of the Shiites there, as well as its rise elsewhere in the Middle East, which he believes to be a sign of hope. He pointed out that Lebanon is organized by 17 sects following its recent civil war and where Shiites have had a revival, developing into a national group. In the past, they have been in conflict with former governments, but now Shiites are builders of a social and educational agenda.
Concerning Hezbollah's rise into a political power and the military conflict with Israel in2006 (not to be viewed as Islam against the West), Nakash believes that out of the conflict, Hezbollah now has greater power. It has organized Christians and Shiites in the government to develop new power. There, as elsewhere in the Middle East, the USA needs to support political development which may lead to a new balance of power in the region. Emphasizing political rather than military power was a constant theme throughout his lecture.
In response, questions were plentiful: (1) Your reviewer asked Nakash to give a brief --- - description of the difference between Shiite and Sunni. The dispute, he said, goes back to who was to be the successor of Mohammed since he had not named one. Then "cultural dimensions developed." (2) A question about the overall conflict in the Middle East, the speaker spoke of how it was complicated by Shiites supported by Iran and Sunnis supported by Saudis. (3) Concerning detente his response was that it is not achieved overnight, but takes years, adding "Bush needs to plant seeds rather than think he can solve issues!" (4) About Israel, he stated that it is not a key player, rather Iran is, hence the importance of the USA position with Iran. He noted that Shiites were always against Al Qaeda. (5) Regarding withdrawal of the USA from Iraq, he said it should not be immediate (not "cut and run"), adding that "Bush is doing a better job than a year ago." (6) As to religion in Iraq, he stated "No secular Iraq in the future." (7) To a question about Israel and the Palestinians resolving their differences? his response was "Try to do it, but resolve the problems of Iraq and Iran first." To a final question (8) about oil, Nakash stated that USA needs a strategy to secure oil from the Middle East, but "before we leave Iraq," he said, "we need to settle the distribution of oil, for the Kurds and Sunnis and Shiites."
Respectfully submitted,
G. P. Mellick Belshaw