Silenced Majorities

John Esposito

1. According to the interviewees, as the most powerful country in the world and a key player in the region, what responsibilities, if any, does the United States hold in relation to the Middle East conflict?
2. What do you think about the premise that tensions and conflicts between the United States and the Muslim world is driven by small groups of extremists on both sides? Do you agree or disagree? Why?
3. In what ways were the comments made by the survey respondents what you expected? In what ways did they surprise you?

Mark Sommer

1. In your opinion and/or experience, what are some examples in which your local, state, or national government pursued policies that DID NOT support the people it was supposed to represent?
2. What do you think of the notion that there are ‘unheard majorities’ on both sides of this conflict?
3. How might it be possible to support both ‘sides’ of the conflict in the Middle East (i.e. Israel and the Arab states) in an evenhanded way? What does evenhandedness mean to you?

Rami Khouri

2.  In Khouri’s view, what misconceptions do Westerners hold about the conflict in the Middle East?

1. Do you agree with Khouri’s analysis of what he calls the ‘colonial imperative?’ In what ways does his analysis make sense to you? In what ways are you skeptical?
2. What many analysts call “insurgencies” and “terrorists” Khouri describes as “resistance movements.” What are the meanings of each term and which do you think best describe the various actors in the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Iraq war?

3. How can a silenced or unheard majority most effectively find and project its voice? Can you recall an experience or political event in which a silenced or unheard majority found its voice and changed the course of history? Describe what happened and consider how the lessons from that experience might apply to broader issues in the Middle East.
4. What do you think inspires people to join extremist movements in the Middle East and/or in the United States? What can individuals or communities in faraway places do to combat the rise of extremism and help elevate moderate voices?

Steven Kull

1. What are some of the basic findings about American and Muslim attitudes from Kull’s survey? Was there anything that surprised you? Why?
2. What common ground and shared values can be found across Western cultures and cultures in the Muslim world?

3. Kull suggests that although most analysts reject the ‘clash of civilizations’ thesis, those who believe in it wield a great deal of influence. What is the attraction of the argument? Do you believe it, and if so, why? If not, why not?
4. Survey results suggest support for American involvement in the conflict in the Middle East, not as a supporter of one side but as an ‘honest broker.’ What would it mean to be an honest broker in this highly polarized conflict? what kinds and levels of engagement make sense in your view, given American interests in the region and perceptions of the United States by those who live there? How do we best judge what are legitimate American interests in the Middle East?

5. People often say, “I’m not political” or “My voice won’t make a difference” and thus opt out of taking action on issues. To what extent are we forced into silence and to what extent do we choose silence ourselves? How can we overcome the sense that our voices and viewpoints won’t be taken into account? What can we do as individuals to change the assumption that there’s nothing we can do to shift the dynamics of a distant conflict? How can we regain a sense of our own ability to influence events and policies on this and other foreign policy issues?
6. How might you use the methods of this interview – conducting a survey and sharing results – on issues of importance in your own experience? What are the implications of survey research on issues in your community and on the substantive topic of the conflict in the Middle East?

Stephen Walt

1. Summarize and evaluate Walt’s analysis of the three primary explanations for the conflict in the Middle East.
2. In size, history, demographics, and other respects, the U.S. and Israel are stark opposites, but some observers see underlying similarities in their attitudes, policies, and place in their respective worlds. What are the similarities and differences between the United States and Israel? How do these characteristics shape both positive and negative perceptions of the United States and Israel in the Muslim world and beyond?
3. Why is Israel’s survival a central concern of American policymakers?

4. In your view, why is the Middle East such an important part of American foreign policy? Why do U.S. policymakers and foreign policy analysts consider it to be a region where vital national interests are at stake? Describe a few reasons and assess which of these factors are valid rationales for American engagement in the region.
5. Walt discusses the role of power on perceptions and actions. In their roles as world and regional powers, respectively, what are the responsibilities of the United States and Israel in the Middle East? What are the responsibilities of other key players both in the region and beyond?

6. Walt asserts that many people in the United States and the Muslim world view the conflict in the Middle East as an important issue from a sense of vicarious identification. How do you feel about this assertion? Are there examples in your own experience where you have felt vicarious identification with one side or another in a distant foreign policy issue? If so, describe how you felt and why.
7. The Arab-Israeli conflict arouses strong emotions in many quarters on all sides of the cultural divide. Have you ever experienced a situation in which you had to balance emotion and passion with rational, thoughtful dialogue and self-questioning? How did you do so? How might you imagine governments striking a similar balance? What pressures are they under as they seek to strike a proper balance in formulating their policies and objectives? Recognizing their constraints, what would you do in their place?

Muqtedar Khan

1. What is the central paradox that Khan argues impedes progress in the Middle East?
2. Describe Khan’s analysis of United States’ war on terror. What do you make of his argument?

3. Do you agree with Khan’s argument about the diminishing effectiveness of military force? Describe instances in which you think military force is justified or not, and defend your position.
4. Khan suggests that two changes – a shift in American foreign policy and fair treatment of both Israelis and Palestinians – are promising strategies. In your opinion, what specific shifts in approach should America take and what would fair treatment for both sides of the conflict look like? Defend your position with evidence from the interview or from other sources of information.

5. Khan “straddles the East-West divide” because he has lived and worked in both cultures. Have you ever had an experience where you could see the validity of all sides in an issues? Describe this situation and discuss its positive and/or negative aspects. What are the implications for understanding, credibility, or bias if one does (or does not) straddle a divide?
6. If you were charged with mediating negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, how would you go about breaking the stalemate between them and creating a new dynamic? How would you deal with extremists on both sides? How would you mobilize the moderate but silent majority?
7. This interview uncovers several paradoxes with respect to the conflict in the Middle East. Describe a situation in your own experience when you had to address a paradox or apparent contradiction in order to resolve a problem? How can we tap into the potentially positive energy inherent in political and social conflict?

Mark Sommer

1. In your view, what are the key differences between acting as citizens versus acting as subjects?
2. What did you learn from this set of interviews? Which ideas did you find persuasive and which did not persuade you?
3. What questions remain or emerged for you after listening to these conversations?
4. What common themes run through most or all the interviews?
5. What might you do in your daily practice – as a student, in an organization, in your community, or as an individual citizen – to act on what you learned from this program?
6. Has your perspective on these issues shifted? If so, in what ways? What issues do you want or intend to learn about in greater depth?