History Fuels the Fire of Anger

BOSTON — The Bush administration might use the scenes of Iraqis toppling statues of Saddam Hussein to portray the American invasion of Iraq as an act of liberation. If that were true, it might expect Iraq, and the Arab world in general, to become more peaceful, more democratic and, most important, less hateful of the United States with the Iraqi dictator gone from the Middle East.

But America's apparent victory in Iraq will probably have the opposite effect. The consequences of its occupation could be extremely dangerous, not only for the region and the international community but also for America.

Even before the war, Arabs burned with anger at the United States. Most U.S. embassies in Arab countries have become fortresses protected by Marines and local security forces. Many times in the last 10 years, hundreds of thousands of Arabs have burst into the streets of their capitals to burn the flags of the United States and Israel. Many called for "opening the door of jihad." Protesters condemned Arab governments allied with the U.S. Sometimes, these governments had to occupy their own capitals with security forces to keep their citizens' anger from exploding into rebellion.

There are many explanations circulating for Arab anger at the U.S., yet few put the phenomenon in historical context. This anger predates the U.S.-led war against Iraq and the destruction rained down on the great city of the Abbasids. It did not originate with the second Palestinian intifada and the series of massacres of Palestinian civilians by Israeli forces. These events fueled the fire, but they did not start it. The fire was already burning.

In Arab eyes, U.S. political and military intervention revives horrible and humiliating memories of colonialism. Any student of modern Arab history knows that colonialism was -- and remains -- a traumatic experience for Arabs. The story of colonialism, as told by an Arab, would begin with the French invasion of Algeria in 1830, proceed to the British invasion of Egypt in 1882, then go on to include the Franco-British mandates in Syria, Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq after World War I. In this story, Israel is a contemporary -- and temporary -- extension of old colonial arrangements.

America's patronage of Israel places it in the camp of colonial powers, and that yields a hard calculus. For many Arabs, an Israeli attack is also an American attack; U.S. intervention is pro-Israeli colonialism, including the American-sponsored peace process.