Black Wave: Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the Forty-Year Rivalry That Unraveled Culture, Religion, and Collective Memory in the Middle East
- Downloads：8608
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-03-25 12:28:46
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Kim Ghattas
- ISBN：1250131200
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
The bestselling author of The Secretary: A Journey with Hillary Clinton from Beirut to the Heart of American Power tells the gripping story of the real roots of the Middle East Sunni-Shia conflict in the 1979 Iran Revolution that changed the region forever。
Black Wave is a paradigm-shifting recasting of the modern history of the Middle East， telling the largely unexplored story of the rivalry between Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shia Iran--a rivalry born out of the sparks of the 1979 Iranian revolution--that has dramatically transformed the culture， identity， and collective memory of millions of Muslims over four decades。 Like George Packer did in The Unwinding， Kim Ghattas follows everyday citizens whose lives have been affected by the geopolitical drama， making her account both immediate and intimate。
Most Americans assume that extremism， Sunni-Shia antagonism， and anti-Americanism have always existed in the Middle East， but prior to 1979， Saudi Arabia and Iran were working allies。 It was only after that year--a remarkable turning point--that Shia Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia began to use religion as a tool in their competition for dominance in the region， igniting the culture wars that led to the 1991 American invasion of Iraq， the September 11th terrorist attacks， and the rise of ISIS。
Ghattas shows how Saudi Arabia and Iran went from allies against the threat of communism from Russia， with major roles in the US anti-Soviet strategy， to mortal enemies that use religious conservatism to incite division and unrest from Egypt to Pakistan。 Black Wave will significantly influence both perception of and conversation about the modern history of the Middle East。
Black Wave is a paradigm-shifting recasting of the modern history of the Middle East， telling the largely unexplored story of the rivalry between Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shia Iran--a rivalry born out of the sparks of the 1979 Iranian revolution--that has dramatically transformed the culture， identity， and collective memory of millions of Muslims over four decades。 Like George Packer did in The Unwinding， Kim Ghattas follows everyday citizens whose lives have been affected by the geopolitical drama， making her account both immediate and intimate。
Most Americans assume that extremism， Sunni-Shia antagonism， and anti-Americanism have always existed in the Middle East， but prior to 1979， Saudi Arabia and Iran were working allies。 It was only after that year--a remarkable turning point--that Shia Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia began to use religion as a tool in their competition for dominance in the region， igniting the culture wars that led to the 1991 American invasion of Iraq， the September 11th terrorist attacks， and the rise of ISIS。
Ghattas shows how Saudi Arabia and Iran went from allies against the threat of communism from Russia， with major roles in the US anti-Soviet strategy， to mortal enemies that use religious conservatism to incite division and unrest from Egypt to Pakistan。 Black Wave will significantly influence both perception of and conversation about the modern history of the Middle East。
Reviews
Bob
，
A good survey， albeit a bit snappish in parts- not without reason， mind you， the central tenet of this book seems to lie in the idea that the Middle East has been decaying thanks to fear mongering， religious zealotry-abetted dictatorships for 40 years。 But even with that thesis， parts of the tone don’t seem earned like Shirer’s Rise and Fall of the Third Reich did。 Honestly， this needs to be twice as long to really work， but it’s an easily readable and easily recommended primer。
Clare
，
Need to do more reading to understand what I think about the book
Danny
，
In Black Wave， Kim Ghattas seeks to explain the Middle East's turn toward religious fanaticism over the past 40 years。 She writes a compelling narrative of how the victory of Islamic fundamentalism in Iran in 1979 sparked a regional Cold War between Saudi Arabia and Iran with Islam at its center。 This war flamed sectarian tensions between Sunni and Shi'a and Iran's and Saudi Arabia's efforts to export their own interpretation of Islam has radicalized and destabilized much of the Middle East。 I a In Black Wave， Kim Ghattas seeks to explain the Middle East's turn toward religious fanaticism over the past 40 years。 She writes a compelling narrative of how the victory of Islamic fundamentalism in Iran in 1979 sparked a regional Cold War between Saudi Arabia and Iran with Islam at its center。 This war flamed sectarian tensions between Sunni and Shi'a and Iran's and Saudi Arabia's efforts to export their own interpretation of Islam has radicalized and destabilized much of the Middle East。 I agree with a lot of what Ghattas argues in Black Wave。 I also think that her writing style is enjoyable and easily accessible to the layman。 The book is generally fair and well-researched。 However I would push back on some of her emphasis。 While she mentions the failures of the Arab World's secular leaders， I don't think she fully acknowledges how these failures contributed to the rise of Political Islam in the 70s and 80s。 Revolutionary movements like the Free Officers in Egypt and their copycats in Iraq， Libya， and Yemen and their ideological Baathist cousins in Syria built authoritarian states， often in the name of fighting Israel， and failed to deliver on the promises they had made to Arab World。 These failures undermined secular Arab nationalists， while more traditional regimes like Saudi Arabia began to accumulate massive oil wealth。 The Saudis had always adhered to a very austere interpretation of Islam and their newfound wealth enabled them to spread their interpretation of Islam and the arguments against secularism。 。。。more
Emily Waltman
，
Scholars of Middle Eastern geopolitics: It's quite possible that you will benefit from this book。 Go nuts。 From my perspective， however， this book was unhelpful。 Actually， it was more than unhelpful。 It was toxic。 "Black Wave" was unhelpful because it presumed more background knowledge than I had。 As a result， I had trouble keeping straight the characters and locales。 This book fell within my "frustrational zone，" and resulted in lots of inattention and irritation。 As consequence， my takeaway fr Scholars of Middle Eastern geopolitics: It's quite possible that you will benefit from this book。 Go nuts。 From my perspective， however， this book was unhelpful。 Actually， it was more than unhelpful。 It was toxic。 "Black Wave" was unhelpful because it presumed more background knowledge than I had。 As a result， I had trouble keeping straight the characters and locales。 This book fell within my "frustrational zone，" and resulted in lots of inattention and irritation。 As consequence， my takeaway from this book was simplistic， as well as harmful: Middle Easterners are religious extremists。 Basically， "Black Wave" explores how Middle Eastern politics became so contentious。 It's a single story that highlights just a few notable， fanatical players。 As an American and a Jew， I have been exposed to this same single story my entire life。 I don't need any more exposure to it; I need to nuance my understanding of the Middle East with different stories of culture， religion， and quotidian life。 While I hesitate to proclaim that no one out there should read this book， I certainly wish I hadn't。 。。。more
Lee Candilin
，
This Black Wave is what is sweeping across the US and much of the western world now: Unyielding animosity and hatred， tendency towards violence， the sowing of discord， the glorifying of relentless disagreements， intolerance of differences in views， and everyone seems to be in a race to prove who is a better patriot。 SIGH。
Jimmit Shah
，
This is how ignorance multiplies and stupidity propagates。 I do not claim to be an expert in the history of the Arab lands but when the author makes inane comments about the history of Pakistan， I feel it is right to call out the ignorance or propaganda。 Two instances show how biased or uninformed the book is- Pakistan's Name: The author casually mentions that Pakistan's name is an acronym of its different territories。 This propaganda has been spread by Pakistan after they butchered their way th This is how ignorance multiplies and stupidity propagates。 I do not claim to be an expert in the history of the Arab lands but when the author makes inane comments about the history of Pakistan， I feel it is right to call out the ignorance or propaganda。 Two instances show how biased or uninformed the book is- Pakistan's Name: The author casually mentions that Pakistan's name is an acronym of its different territories。 This propaganda has been spread by Pakistan after they butchered their way through Bangladesh （East Pakistan at that time） and then lost the war to India in 1971。 It is Pakistan's way of making people forget how savage their existence has been and of subtly pushing the Kashmir agenda。 The author's inclusion of this， even casually， prepares ground for future credibility of such stupid claims- Jinnah's Pakistan: In many instances， the author shifts the blame of extremism to a handful of people （e。g。 in Iran's case on Khomeini） rather than going to the roots of extremism。 Her description of the foundation of Pakistan is another example。 She states how Jinnah wanted a secular state led by Muslims。 The reality of the partition is very different。 Same Jinnah was the one who called for Direct Action Day that led to massacre of Hindus。 By laying the blame of extremism in Pakistan on Zia-ul-Haq， the author pardons the millions of collaborators and supporters of Jinnah。 This is akin to saying that Hitler wanted to have a tolerant state with Jews under Germans but Heinrich Himmler undid his plans and the 'Good Germans' （read general Pakistani population） had nothing to do with the systemic persecution of Hindus， Christians， Sikhs and Jews in the country。 Since the majority of the book is focused on the events in the Middle East， I cannot comment on which of the events represented are tinted by similar bias and propaganda。 However， these two instances are enough to call into question the entire premise and basis of the book 。。。more
William Dinneen
，
This book should be required reading。 If you want to really understand why the Middle East is like it is （1929-2018） then this is the place to start。
Fred Bouwman
，
I really enjoyed this book。 It offers a sweeping look at how the Iranian revolution of 1979 changed so much in the Middle East。 I had never considered how inter-related that event was to so many countries。 It also explains a lot about the rise of ISIS， the the weaponization of religion and the divide between Sunni and Shia。Very highly recommended，
Josh Lebowitz
，
Very dense and incredibly informative。 Not necessarily a fun read， but I would definitely recommend it to anyone interested learning more about the modern Middle East as a whole。
Sean
，
It's a very good sign when the biggest complaint you have about a book at the end is that it wasn't long enough。 Ghattas unpacks the history of the Middle East since the major events of 1979 - the Iranian Revolution， the siege of the Holy Mosque in Mecca， and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan - tracing how the 'black wave' of sectarianism and fundamentalism has infected the entire region， and how the actions of Iran and Saudi Arabia drive the shift away from pluralism and tolerance to the prese It's a very good sign when the biggest complaint you have about a book at the end is that it wasn't long enough。 Ghattas unpacks the history of the Middle East since the major events of 1979 - the Iranian Revolution， the siege of the Holy Mosque in Mecca， and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan - tracing how the 'black wave' of sectarianism and fundamentalism has infected the entire region， and how the actions of Iran and Saudi Arabia drive the shift away from pluralism and tolerance to the present day。 Covering a wide geographical area - from Egypt to Pakistan - and thus a wide variety of societies and cultures， Ghattas utilises both a wide historical lens and the testimony of ordinary people on the ground to advance her arguments。 Doing all of this in under 350 pages is quite an achievement， and the one criticism I would have is that I think the scope of the book deserves a longer treatment - I could easily have read 700-800 pages of material on the subject。 。。。more
Fasal Mt
，
Ever since I started reading the ‘international’ page of Mathrubhumi（regional newspaper） the Middle East was confusing yet intriguing， full of contradictions。I had witnessed a hartal against the hanging of Saddam Hussain， later read about the Anfal genocide。Read about the Saudi-American funded Afgan war， and the Jihad it followed。Iran went through a people's revolution and overthrew its dictator， yet democracy is at bay and the authority seems to oppress all the uprising against the clerical rul Ever since I started reading the ‘international’ page of Mathrubhumi（regional newspaper） the Middle East was confusing yet intriguing， full of contradictions。I had witnessed a hartal against the hanging of Saddam Hussain， later read about the Anfal genocide。Read about the Saudi-American funded Afgan war， and the Jihad it followed。Iran went through a people's revolution and overthrew its dictator， yet democracy is at bay and the authority seems to oppress all the uprising against the clerical rule。Saw the Arab spring blooming and it’s eventual wither。Heard about Syria， where numerous forces are competing with each other and human life being the least valued element。Recently， news of Saudi legalising driving licence for women followed the abduction and brutal killing of Jamal Khashoggi。Here， Kim Ghattas combs through history to understand what happened in the Middle East which pushed the region to the constant flux of conflicts and suffering。 She asserts most of the developments in the last three decades to 1979， the establishment of the Islamic republic in Iran followed by the revolution and Saudi’s embrace and enforcement of puritanistic Islam （Wahhabism） It’d be a good read if you are interested to understand the complex（very complex） web of Middle East politics and it’ll help you to make sense out of many stories coming out from the oil-rich deserts。 。。。more
Rookie
，
Really well written and very interesting - even for people following developments in the region for decades。 Occasionally， I differed with the author on the depiction of some events， seeing them through a different lens， interpreting them differently， drawing different conclusions。 （Some events raised more questions with their very glaring omission）。 Was Shariati influential in determining the direction the Iranian Revolution would take？ No。 He died before the Revolution - nor did I recognise hi Really well written and very interesting - even for people following developments in the region for decades。 Occasionally， I differed with the author on the depiction of some events， seeing them through a different lens， interpreting them differently， drawing different conclusions。 （Some events raised more questions with their very glaring omission）。 Was Shariati influential in determining the direction the Iranian Revolution would take？ No。 He died before the Revolution - nor did I recognise his work （read in a Berkeley translation） from anything said here。Was Pakistan ever as much of a Wahabi place as she suggests？ Never。 The radicals were always a small minority， fuelled by foreign money。 The dominant culture of the country is vastly different to that described here。 There’s little mention of Sabra and Shatila in her 1982 chapter ‘Karbala in Beirut’ - and the PLO had pulled out before September， no？ ‘Very broad brush strokes’ would be my main criticism of the book 。 Nonetheless it still made for a very interesting read， engaging and refreshingly readable。Just keep in mind that there are more varied views on the events depicted。 。。。more
Robert
，
A Confluence of Toxic Currents Informative， well written， a history narrated through the stories of the people who lived it， mostly Saudi， Iranian， Lebanese， Egyptian， Pakistani， Iraqi， Syrian。 Ghattas lays out the destruction and repression that the intense rivalry between the competing Islamic extremisms of Saudi Arabia and Iran has brought to the Middle East and South Asia。 If there is a criticism to be made， it is that the coverage is more episodic than comprehensive。 She does not really add A Confluence of Toxic Currents Informative， well written， a history narrated through the stories of the people who lived it， mostly Saudi， Iranian， Lebanese， Egyptian， Pakistani， Iraqi， Syrian。 Ghattas lays out the destruction and repression that the intense rivalry between the competing Islamic extremisms of Saudi Arabia and Iran has brought to the Middle East and South Asia。 If there is a criticism to be made， it is that the coverage is more episodic than comprehensive。 She does not really address the underlying reasons why Islam has become a thoroughly politicized religion， an ideology as much as a faith。 But her history is valuable for its focus on the experiences and perspectives of Arabs， Iranians， and South Asians， rather than the preoccupations of Western policymakers。 。。。more
Luiz Henrique
，
Solid introduction to Sunni-Shia rivalry in the Greater Middle East。 It will give you a nice overview of historical events since 1979， intertwined with personal stories， across a wide range of countries。 You won’t find much in terms of hard， matter-of-fact geopolitics and economics， but it still makes for a good read。
Lindsay
，
This is a fantastic look at the Saudi-Iran rivalry with impressive depth and scope。 Even more impressive is that while covering the history of this rivalry in sweeping detail across a diverse region， Kim Ghattas manages to weave in compelling personal narratives of those throughout the region swept up by this rivalry。
John Calhoun
，
Ghattas argues here that 1979 was the day 'everything started to go wrong' for the Middle East。 She fingers three events as representing the turning point: （1） the Iranian Revolution， which created a revolutionarily-minded Shia country that truly believes it's destined to spread Islam around the world; （2） the fundamentalist siege of Mecca， which led to the Sauds allowing the Wahhabists to have more control over the country and foreign funding as a way of staying in power; and （3） the Soviet inv Ghattas argues here that 1979 was the day 'everything started to go wrong' for the Middle East。 She fingers three events as representing the turning point: （1） the Iranian Revolution， which created a revolutionarily-minded Shia country that truly believes it's destined to spread Islam around the world; （2） the fundamentalist siege of Mecca， which led to the Sauds allowing the Wahhabists to have more control over the country and foreign funding as a way of staying in power; and （3） the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan， which created the training ground for militant Islam。 Ghattas argues these basic points well， but at much too much length。 The book has a good kernel of truth in it， and Ghattas clearly understands the region well。 This would've been an excellent 170 page book but was often irritating in its digressions at 320'ish。 My only other substantive criticism is Ghattas doesn't really explore the structural causes behind ~why~ those three events happened in 1979， especially the Iranian Revolution and the Mecca siege。 Would've liked to see more re: perhaps looking to alternatives after Arab nationalism a la Nasser was discredited by the lost 67 and 73 wars。 。。。more
Nazmi Yaakub
，
Bagi sebahagian， apa yang berlaku di Asia Barat atau Timur Tengah， dilihat dengan kerangka pertembungan Sunni dengan Syiah atau Islam（ist） dengan sekular/liberal。 Kerangka ini apabila dipacu dengan semangat yang lebih emosional， bukan sahaja akan mendorong salah faham terhadap realiti yang berlaku， bahkan menjadi sebahagian masalah yang menyebabkan krisis， permusuhan dan perang tidak berkesudahan。Namun bagi pengarang buku ini， Kim Ghattas， apa yang berlaku perlu dilihat daripada dua peristiwa pe Bagi sebahagian， apa yang berlaku di Asia Barat atau Timur Tengah， dilihat dengan kerangka pertembungan Sunni dengan Syiah atau Islam（ist） dengan sekular/liberal。 Kerangka ini apabila dipacu dengan semangat yang lebih emosional， bukan sahaja akan mendorong salah faham terhadap realiti yang berlaku， bahkan menjadi sebahagian masalah yang menyebabkan krisis， permusuhan dan perang tidak berkesudahan。Namun bagi pengarang buku ini， Kim Ghattas， apa yang berlaku perlu dilihat daripada dua peristiwa penting yang berlaku pada akhir dekad 1970-an yang kelak memberi kesan dan pengaruh terhadap hegemoni politik yang cuba dikenakan dua kuasa di Asia Barat， iaitu Iran dan Arab Saudi dengan menggunakan percikan emosional daripada kefahaman agama yang cuba dilagakan。Peristiwa pertama ialah Revolusi Iran （yang awalnya sering dilabelkan sebagai Revolusi Islam termasuk oleh pemimpin politik Islamis di Malaysia yang sangat terpengaruh dengan ‘kejayaan’ Khomeini walaupun sejarah sejarahnya ia turut dibentuk dan diacu oleh golongan sosialis dan Marxist） dan peristiwa kedua adalah rampasan Masjidil Haram di Makkah di tangan golongan ekstremis， Juhayman al-Otaibi yang kelak membentuk kerangka tindakan kedua-dua negara itu， Iran dan Arab Saudi dalam bentuk tersendiri tetapi membawa falsafah sama - faham agama yang dibentukkan secara keras， terkeluar daripada aliran utama Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah （ASWJ） dan Syiah itu sendiri tetapi menggunakan nama dengan cara salah。Di sinilah kesilapan utama sebahagian daripada kita apabila menyentuh peristiwa susulan seperti hubungan antara Islamist dengan regim Anwar Sadat di Mesir， pencerobohan Israel di Lubnan， kebangkitan kelompok Hizbullah di negara itu， Taliban di Afghanistan， Zia-ul-Haq di Pakistan， revolusi terbaru di rantau itu， penindasan regim Assad dan penentangan rakyat Syria， krisis di Yaman dan gelombang ekstremis paling dahsyat， ISIS。Melihat apa yang berlaku hanya dengan neraca Sunni-Syiah atau Islamis-sekular/liberal hanya menambahkan kekeliruan。 Ini kerana hubungan Arab Saudi-Iran sendiri sangat unik sejak akhir 1970-an itu yang tidak hanya berseteru semata-mata， sebaliknya seperti permainan tarik tali yang berbahaya。 Begitu juga sokongan dan campur tangan kedua-dua negara terhadap negara serantau seperti Lubnan， Syria dan Yaman tidak hanya dalam kerangka semata-mata memperluaskan atau memperkukuhkan fahaman ASWJ atau Syiah。ASWJ dan Syiah bukan baru tiba-tiba ada di rantau itu。 Di Arab Saudi sendiri， penganut Syiah sudah wujud di negara itu terutama di bahagian timur yang memiliki simpanan minyak yang besar。 Di Yaman， umat Islam sudah hidup bersama walaupun pastinya akan ada pergeseran dan perselisihan tetapi ia bukan dalam skala seperti sekarang。 Di Syria， adalah salah untuk melihat ia semata-mata pertembungan antara penganut ASWJ dengan Syiah。Barangkali inilah kesilapan apabila kedua-dua negara ‘diizinkan’ untuk memegang label penaung ASWJ dan Syiah。 Wahabi pada awal kewujudannya di tangan Muhammad Ibnu Abdul Wahab dianggap menyeleweng dan terkeluar daripada fahaman ASWJ hingga ia ditentang oleh bapa dan saudara kandungnya sendiri serta dibantah termasuk secara penulisan oleh ulama termasuk Mufti Mazhab Shafie di Makkah， Sheikh Zaini Dahlan serta ulama daripada keturunan Rasulullah SAW。 Wilayatul Faqih di tangan Khomeini pula adalah fahaman yang dianggap tidak mungkin boleh dikeluarkan daripada makna kewalian kepada ibu tunggal dan anak yatim tetapi digunakan oleh Khomeini bukan sahaja sebagai satu turning point， bahkan sebagai satu platform untuk mengambil dan memperkukuhkan ‘kuasa ayatollah’ dalam politik dan negara。Buku ini mendedahkan hubungan dan perkaitan antara setiap insiden serta peristiwa yang berlaku di rantau Asia Barat dengan naratif yang menarik。 Penceritaannya akan berpusat pada satu tokoh yang melihat apa yang berlaku dan natijah daripada kedua-dua peristiwa asal pada dekad 1970-an itu terhadap apa disaksikannya。 Di sinilah menjadikan buku ini sukar dilepaskan meskipun saya dapat mengesan beberapa konsep diterima secara blanket oleh pengarang meskipun ia tidak tepat seperti hakikat ASWJ dan Syiah dalam konteks sejarah awal pada zaman sahabat dulu。 Bagaimanapun， ia tidak menjejaskan keseluruhan kandungannya。Pada masa sama， tentangan terhadap hegemoni Arab Saudi dan Iran ini hanya dilihat dari sudut aktivis hak asasi dan liberalisme。 Fahaman kaku yang cuba dijadikan hegemoni sebenarnya bukanlah menjadi pegangan majoriti umat Islam。 Barangkali ada terpengaruh tetapi bukan atas kefahaman yang jelas terhadap bahaya aliran-aliran ini， sebaliknya hanya melihat sebahagian daripada kepelbagaian dalam agama。Justeru， wajar sekali untuk melihat dari sudut majoriti umat Islam khususnya aliran sufi dan tariqat serta ilmuwan Islam yang berpegang teguh dengan faham ASWJ berasaskan Asyairah dan Maturidiyah （seperti Sheikh Ben Bayyah dan Dr Ali Jumaah） serta dalam sesetengah kes， Athari （seperti Dr Yasir Qadhi） yang sudah tentu cara ‘penentangan’ terhadap hegemoni kuasa kedua-dua negara itu berlainan dengan apa yang dilakukan aktivis hak asasi/liberalisme tanpa menafikan ada sisi perbezaan antara kedua-dua golongan terbabit。Secara keseluruhannya， buku ini wajar dibaca sebagai antara bacaan yang boleh meletakkan kedudukan sebenar geopolitik di Asia Barat/Timur Tengah dalam perluasan dan pengukuhan hegemoni Arab Saudi serta Iran dengan menggunakan agama yang difahami secara keras dan salah。 Sudah tentu satu judul saja tidak cukup kerana pengarang melihatnya dari perspektif aktivis hak asasi dan liberalis， sedangkan wacana terhadap hegemoni itu turut membabitkan golongan sufi dan tariqat serta ilmuwan ASWJ sebenar。 。。。more
C。L。 Clark
，
Wow wow wow。 A difficult analysis and thorough dive into history that is not quite history as it’s still very much active in the current landscape， made extraordinarily readable and approachable。 I think in particular Americans should read this。。。
Rubi Valentin-Jaranson
，
This book shed some light over the darkness that swept the Middle East since 1979。 It was very eye opening。 Thank you Kim Ghattas。 Excellent and brake work！
Navraj。Kaler
，
I literally enjoyed every chapter of this book。 It is written so beautifully。 Anyone who want to understand what happened to the muslim world and what role Iran and Saudi had played or is playing， should definitely go for this book。
Michael
，
Fascinating insight into the history of the Middle East。 Looks into the momentous changes started by the 1979 revolution in Iran。 Kim Ghattis gives a nuanced and clearheaded telling of the effects of the events of 1979 have had on the region。
Tariq Mahmood
，
The book is extremely well researched and successfully answers the question What went wrong with the Muslims of the Middle East and Pakistan。 Why did certain countries turn Islamist？ Guilty countries are Saudi Arabia and Iran， which both want to control their own populations in the name of their own brand of Islam。 Sunni and Shia brand。 Sunni Saudi Arabia presents a more dangerous future under MBS who can potentially be the king for the next 50 years。 Yes， the Islamic revolution is dangerous as The book is extremely well researched and successfully answers the question What went wrong with the Muslims of the Middle East and Pakistan。 Why did certain countries turn Islamist？ Guilty countries are Saudi Arabia and Iran， which both want to control their own populations in the name of their own brand of Islam。 Sunni and Shia brand。 Sunni Saudi Arabia presents a more dangerous future under MBS who can potentially be the king for the next 50 years。 Yes， the Islamic revolution is dangerous as well but at least there are popular agitations by the Iranian people from time to time。 can we expect a change for the better？ 。。。more
Rinie Altena
，
Heldere analyse
Janis Agurjanovs
，
Highly enjoyable and enlightening book。 I felt like I knew a bit about the Middle East history and the conflict between the two countries but this book showed that this was not the case。 Kim does a great job of explaining what happened in 1979 and how Irans and Saudi Arabias actions since then changed the region in so many ways。 Her way of writing was easy to follow and the highly researched nature of the book made it hard to put down。Well worth a read。
Philip Meneses
，
Ghattas creates a magisterial chronicle of forty years since the fateful year of 1979 and the rivalry that has developed between Iran and Saudi Arabia， which has done no good for the citizens of either country。 Despotic leaders in each country hoard and wantonly waste resources in a perpetual chess game。 It’s been a grim forty years， but Ghattas does find hope in the activists that continue to persist in the face of tyranny。
Lucy Briggs
，
Knowing little about the varied conflicts in the Middle East， this book was a stretch for me。 It was， however， very informative and has inspired me to read more。 Here are a few thing that stood out: where does blind hatred come from？; versions of the Koran were published to view Jews and Christians as targets for hate; a movement from secular to religious law; how martyrdom was viewed， changed to become a desirable goal itself; war until victory; corruption/greed; propaganda and indoctrination; Knowing little about the varied conflicts in the Middle East， this book was a stretch for me。 It was， however， very informative and has inspired me to read more。 Here are a few thing that stood out: where does blind hatred come from？; versions of the Koran were published to view Jews and Christians as targets for hate; a movement from secular to religious law; how martyrdom was viewed， changed to become a desirable goal itself; war until victory; corruption/greed; propaganda and indoctrination; radicalized communities。 。。。more
Max
，
Ghattas points to 1979 as a watershed， the year when the Middle East gave way to fundamentalist Islam。 She uses the terms Salafist， Wahhabi， and Islamist to refer to strict interpretations of Islam that call for religious rule and impose strict moral codes and severe punishments particularly on women。 Ghattas takes us through the recent rise of Salafism in Iran， Saudi Arabia， Egypt， Lebanon and Pakistan。 She shows this led to widespread sectarian conflict throughout the region， pitting Shia agai Ghattas points to 1979 as a watershed， the year when the Middle East gave way to fundamentalist Islam。 She uses the terms Salafist， Wahhabi， and Islamist to refer to strict interpretations of Islam that call for religious rule and impose strict moral codes and severe punishments particularly on women。 Ghattas takes us through the recent rise of Salafism in Iran， Saudi Arabia， Egypt， Lebanon and Pakistan。 She shows this led to widespread sectarian conflict throughout the region， pitting Shia against Sunni and Iran against Saudi Arabia as Islamists on both sides condemned all competing interpretations of religion。 An accomplished liberal secular minded woman born and raised in Lebanon， Ghattas is appalled at what has become of Arab culture and the Middle East in the last forty years。 She uses personal stories to illustrate her points profiling key figures including activists and dissidents who stood up to oppressive regimes adding human interest to the book。 These personal vignettes are missing in my sketchy notes that follow which just outline the main events that underlie her argument。Ghattas begins with the Iranian Revolution of 1978-79。 She profiles important figures leading up to the revolution focusing on Ayatollah Khomeini。 She covers a lot of ground in a short space。 A few points caught my attention。 First， in 1978 just months before the revolution began， Saddam Hussein called the Shah telling him they should get rid of Khomeini， who had been in Iraq for years， since he was trouble for both of them。 The Shah declined。 Second， Khomeini achieved power for his oppressive Islamic government by co-opting a revolution organized by leftist secularists who ended up horrified at the way the revolution turned out。 Third， the takeover of the American Embassy and ensuing hostage crisis was orchestrated and carried out by leftists who were stridently anti-American。 Khomeini had not been paying particular attention to America， but he embraced anti-Americanism as a way to cement his power once the embassy was overrun。In Saudi Arabia in 1979， the Holy Mosque in Mecca was seized by local religious zealots。 The Saudi government had been allowing Western culture to creep in， much to the angst of Salafists。 It took government forces months to get them out of the Mosque。 The Saudi King decided he needed to make some accommodations to the Islamists to preserve order。 Adding to Saudi concern was an uprising of Shia oil workers。 Saudi rulers turned to their relationships with clerics that preached an extreme form of Islam known as Wahhabism。 So Saudi Arabia backtracked， particularly on laws regarding women， which were the ones that upset Wahhabis the most。 Women would no longer be seen on TV or in other public occupations。 Many women would lose their jobs。 The government began to heavily fund “the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice。” Prayer times were now strictly enforced。Meanwhile， in Iran a ten year campaign of terror began。 The Shah had forced secularization on Iran。 The elites had exposed Iran to much more modernity than that experienced in Saudi Arabia and Khomeini demanded fast and dramatic change back。 Thousands would be tortured， imprisoned and executed including many who had helped lead the revolution。 Universities were closed for years while they were recast as Islamist institutions， at least in the liberal arts。 Science was left alone。 Women were forced to dress to Salafist standards and were excluded from numerous activities。 Khomeini hated the equally repressive Wahhabism which considered Shia Islam heretical。 In 1945 he had written that the Saudis were “the camel grazers of Riyadh， the barbarians of Najd [Saudi desert]， the most infamous and the wildest members of the human family。” Saudi Arabia’s leadership began positioning themselves as the leader of all Muslims。 This set off Khomeini。 He intended to be the leader of the Islamic world。 In Egypt Anwar Sadat had assumed power in 1970。 He went right where Nasser had gone left。 He empowered the religious authorities in order to break Nasser’s bureaucracy。 He broke with the Soviet Union， made friends with America and peace with Israel to get back the Sinai。 The clerics turned against Sadat as he brought alien Western influences and more blatant inequality to Egypt。 The marginalized， particularly rural people who had migrated to the cities， turned to Salafist organizations that gave them a sense of purpose and identity。 Khomeini demanded that the Egyptian people overthrow Sadat comparing him to the Shah。 In 1981 Sadat began mass imprisoning of dissidents， many inspired by the Iranian Revolution。 Soon after， he was assassinated。In Pakistan General Zia-ul-Haq staged a coup in 1977 doing away with free elections。 He was a dictator and self-described “soldier of Islam。” Pakistan had been founded thirty years earlier by Muhammad Ali Jinnah， a Shia who believed in separation of church and state。 But over time Islamist politics gained strength culminating in Zia who set about to enforce Sharia law。 In 1979 he promulgated an Islamic “system” of government。 Laws were changed to enforce Salafist standards of dress and behavior: the wearing of vails for women， enforcement of prayer times， severe punishment for intoxication， fornication and adultery。 Women were especially targeted and severely limited in public activities。 For example， women were not allowed to play sports in public。 In Syria Hafez Assad， who had come to power in 1970， tortured and executed dissidents just as his son would continue to do。 In 1979 the terror in cities like Aleppo and Hamas was profound。 Ghattas quotes a student who told her “You don’t know。 The people die like rain。” Syria caught in the middle between the Saudis and Iranians chose to side with Iran。 More chaos erupted。 Christmas Eve 1979 the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan。 The Saudi’s vowed to help the resistance。 1979 was a seminal year across the Islamic world。 Then in 1980 Saddam Hussein invaded Iran starting a war that lasted eight brutal years ending in a stalemate。 In the 1980s Lebanon also became a battleground。 The Palestinians had established a presence in the southern part of the country where they could harass the Israelis。 The Israelis invaded in 1982 and Iran seized an opportunity quickly sending Revolutionary Guards to aid and train the Palestinians as well as recruit and propagandize the Lebanese Shia giving birth to Hezbollah。 Hezbollah， Party of God， was formed to replicate the Salafist values of its namesake in Iran。 It was designed to export the Iranian Revolution to Lebanon。 In response Saudi Arabia put forward a peace plan to settle the Palestinian – Israeli conflict。 For this Iran condemned the Saudi Crown Prince calling him the enemy of Islam。Hezbollah employed a tactic new to the Middle East， suicide bombers。 In 1982 an Israeli command post was blown up by a truck bomb killing 75， then in 1983 another truck was driven into the U。S。 embassy killing 63 followed by a truck driven into the U。S。 Marine barracks in Beirut killing 241 Americans and French paratroopers， over 300 people in total。 The Americans and French were part of a peace keeping force。 In 1985 Israel withdrew to a much smaller buffer zone along the border。 Hezbollah gained strength winning over Shia communities and enforcing strict Islamist laws。 Lebanon became deeply divided along religious lines。Pakistan in the 1980s evolved into a Shia-Sunni battleground。 Khomeini claimed to be the protector of Shias everywhere。 Pakistan had a large Shia minority。 Soon Khomeini proselytizers were in Pakistan converting Shias to Khomeini’s fiery brand of Islam including condemnation of the Saudis。 In response Saudi Wahhabi loyalists and jihadists like Egyptian Ayman Zawahiri， future al-Qaeda number two， came to Pakistan inflaming the Sunni’s。 Up to this time， Islamist revolutionaries targeted their own countries， now they were organizing transnationally。 Saudi contingents distributed aid in Pakistan including setting up many schools that taught Wahhabi Islam heavily influencing Sunni communities。 These began in Peshawar close to Afghanistan where “Arab Afghans” flowed from the Middle East to fight the Russians。 Anti-Shia rhetoric raged。 Militias formed， assassinations took place， and in 1987 Sunnis attacked Shia villages， Shias retaliated， hundreds died， a war between sects not countries had erupted。Egypt in the 1980s turned to Salafist Islam， a U-turn for a country that still revered the iconic secular President Nasser。 Some of it was a reaction to Khomeini and much was due to Saudi influence。 Saudi Arabia was booming and importing workers in the 1980s。 By 1985 1。2 million Egyptians worked there。 They brought back Saudi religious values along with the money。 Saudi money was also financing fundamentalist religious leaders who were driving cultural change。 In 1985 6% of books published in Egypt were religious; in 1994 it was 25%。 In the mid-1980s there was a mosque for every 6，031 Egyptians， by the 2000s there was a mosque for every 745 Egyptians。 Many women adopted the veil and Islamist dress。 Religious edicts increasingly dictated acceptable behavior。In Saudi Arabia in 1995 a bomb exploded killing six Americans who were training the Saudi National Guard。 This was the first attack against foreigners on Saudi soil。 The government rounded up hundreds of extremists but still didn’t link its support for Wahhabi clerics to the violence。 In 1996 a tanker truck filled with explosives killed nineteen Americans and injured 400 at a U。S。 Air force building in Saudi Arabia。 The culprit was the ever more organized and powerful Hezbollah， sponsored by Iran。 However the Saudis were seeking rapprochement with Iran and downplayed the linkage。 Then came the 9-11 attack on the U。S。 with fifteen Saudis participating。 Saudi leadership still refused to connect the Islamist culture to the people that carried out the attack。 Then in 2003 two bombings targeted foreign Muslims in Saudi Arabia killing over fifty and wounding four hundred including children。 Al-Qaeda carried out the attacks。 The Saudi leaders started to realize they had a terrorism problem。The U。S。 invasion of Iraq in 2003 emboldened terrorists and ignited Sunni-Shia sectarian violence。 Saddam’s ruthless dictatorship had kept a lid on Sunni-Shia conflict。 Now hothead leaders and jihadists turned followers into armies。 In 2006 in Samarra， home of future ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi， two ten century old mosques were bombed。 This was the beginning of all out Sunni-Shia war not only in Iraq， but in Lebanon and Pakistan as well。 America had eliminated two of Iran’s enemies: Saddam and the Taliban。 Iran made headway in Lebanon through Hezbollah under Syrian control。 Syria had 40，000 troops in Lebanon， one for every 100 Lebanese。 Hezbollah assassinated the Sunni Prime Minister Hariri， a close ally of the Saudi King and Crown Prince， with Syria’s blessing。In Pakistan in 2011， a governor was assassinated for defending a Christian accused of blasphemy。 The assailant proudly surrendered confident heaven awaited him。 He was executed， but tens of thousands protested believing he was justified。 A mosque was constructed in the murderer's honor。 The impact of years of Saudi money promoting Wahhabi doctrine was widespread。 Salafist Sunni culture was becoming the norm。 Christians， Hindus and Shias were targeted。 Half of all Pakistanis did not believe Shias were Muslims。In Egypt in the 1990s satellite television stations proliferated。 Many were funded by rich Saudis and spread Salafist ideology which incited violence against those not adhering to its strict code of dress and behavior。 While most people believed or just fell in line， others particularly the young wanted a freer life。 Both groups burst out in the Arab Spring of 2011 which brought down President Hosni Mubarak after thirty years in power。 Mohammad Morsi， a member of the Muslim Brotherhood became president。 The Saudi leadership was fearful that the revolution would spread to their country。 They blamed the Brotherhood and Shias influenced by Iran for Egypt’s revolution。 They ignored the divisiveness generated by Saudi Wahhabi culture exported to Egypt。 In 2013 Morsi was driven out by throngs of protestors strongly backed by the Saudis and Emiratis。 Then came ISIS。 Facing revolt and the Free Syrian Army in 2011 Assad emptied his jails of prisoners including many Islamists。 They joined Salafist groups that fought Assad and the Free Syrian Army dramatically weakening it。 These groups were ultimately subsumed by ISIS。 In 2013 Baghdadi moved to Syria ready to establish his caliphate。 Also in 2013 Hezbollah and Iranian Quds force fighters spread out over Syria in support of Assad。 Sectarian Islamist warfare between Sunni and Shia consumed the region。Ghattas goes on to describe dissidents and protests in Saudi Arabia and Iran against the strictures of their respective repressive governments。 Despite being mortal enemies that denounced the other’s religion， the two countries treated their citizens， particularly women， with the same authoritarian grip。 Both countries enforced draconian dress and behavior codes on women allowing them little if any freedom。 Ghattas ends with a profile of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman， a millennial who relaxes the religious restrictions on women， but who with his father King Salman rules Saudi Arabia with a heavy hand。 He doesn’t tolerate critics and Ghattas details the murder of Jamal Khashoggi。 Bin Salman uses Saudi nationalism to replace religious zeal going to war in Yemen to counter Iran and Hezbollah。 Ghattas asks “What happened to us？” Born and raised in Lebanon she laments the fate of Arab culture and especially Arab women over the last forty years。 Her book is essentially a document of “What happened"。 It lays out from a liberal Middle Eastern point of view the deterioration of Arab society at the hands of religious fundamentalists and political opportunists。 She distinguishes the forces at play in each country and shows how domestic politics lead to regional sectarian conflict。 At heart she sees Arabs and Persians desiring democracy and the same freedoms as everyone else。 But charismatic leaders lied to them， misguided them and led them to chaos and repression。 Ghattas’ book made me consider what could have become of us in the U。S。 if Trump had won a second term and established autocratic power。 Is there any doubt about how he would have treated dissidents and the forces he would have unleashed？ 。。。more
PottWab Regional Library
，
E
Vinton
，
I cannot express how much I enjoyed this book。 As an Anti-Nationalist I found answers for why this regions deep cultural bonds have been further strained and as someone interested in inter-religious cooperation this book answered so many questions about the rising sectarian rage。 Though a very dark topic， the author dives into such and important issue。 There are so many misunderstandings about the conflicts in south Western Asia （Middle East and Central and South Asia） and this book is a true ge I cannot express how much I enjoyed this book。 As an Anti-Nationalist I found answers for why this regions deep cultural bonds have been further strained and as someone interested in inter-religious cooperation this book answered so many questions about the rising sectarian rage。 Though a very dark topic， the author dives into such and important issue。 There are so many misunderstandings about the conflicts in south Western Asia （Middle East and Central and South Asia） and this book is a true gem to go beyond those stereotypes and tropes。 Wonderfully researched and engaging writing。 I think this is a must read for anyone even slightly interested in the Middle East。 Such an excellent book。 。。。more
Sandeep Narayanan
，