Gilbert Achcar | |
|---|---|
 Achcar inABF-huset in Stockholm, Sweden. | |
| Born | (1951-11-05)5 November 1951 (age 74) |
| Scientific career | |
| Fields | Academic andwriter |
Gilbert Achcar (Arabic:جلبير الأشقر; 5 November 1951) is a Lebanesesocialist academic and writer. He is a Professor of Development Studies and International Relations at theSchool of Oriental and African Studies of theUniversity of London.
His research interests cover theNear East andNorth Africa, theforeign policy of the United States,globalization,Islam, andIslamic fundamentalism.
He is also a Fellow at theInternational Institute for Research and Education.
Born in Senegal, Achcar was raised in Lebanon, where he obtained degrees in philosophy and the social sciences atLebanese University and was a member of theRevolutionary Communist Group.[2] He took up residence in France in 1983, and completed his doctorate in social history and international relations at theUniversity of Paris VIII, where in 1991 he began teaching political science, sociology, and international relations. In 2003 he took up a research position at theMarc Bloch Centre inBerlin, which he maintained until he assumed a professorship atSOAS.
Achcar'sThe Arabs and the Holocaust, published in 2010, analyzes the collaboration between Arab leaders and the Nazis and the impact of those relationships on modern Arab-Israeli relationships. According toTariq Ali, it dismantles in a scholarly way what he calls the "simplistic myths" that emerged in the wake of the establishment of the State of Israel.[3] In the book, Achcar argues that it is ironic Israel preferred to deal with a "notorious Jew-hater" likeAnwar Sadat, who regarded Jews as a "treacherous people", instead ofGamal Abdel Nasser, and it preferredMahmoud Abbas toYasser Arafat, though aware of the former's remarks on the Holocaust, and he questions:
Is it an accident that Israel's rulers chose to sign treaties with Anwar Sadat rather than Nasser, and preferred Abbas over Arafat? Or is it a sign of elective affinities between Jew haters and Arab haters, whose vision of the world is the same, only stood on its head?[4]
"Statist Zionism is aJanus," Achcar adds, with "one face towards the Holocaust, the other toward theNakba," in that it faces not only the persecutions suffered in the Holocaust but also the subsequent oppression it has inflicted on Palestinians. Achcar concludes that genuine dialogue can only arise if both realities are confronted.[5]
According toTony Greenstein, writing inHoly Land Studies, the book is "based on a considerable body of research" and its strongest point is its treatment of the understanding of the Holocaust in Arab society. Greenstein argues that Achcar sometimes engages inspecial pleading in favor of Zionism.[6] InRace & Class,Ralph M. Coury describes the book as magisterial in its "ability to integrate a story of Arab intellectual and political diversity with the story of how this diversity has often been reduced to a monolithic caricature", but he suggests that the author may overstate the role of narratives.[7] Anaheed Al-Hardan, inBritish Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, described the book as "a powerful and nuanced indictment of what is an essentialising and demonising discourse on the Arabs and the Holocaust".[8]
The Arabs and the Holocaust was reviewed unfavorably byJeffrey Herf, who wrote inThe New Republic that the book undermines its virtues with "superficial, unfair, and unreliable readings of those with whom he disagrees" and that such attacks do not contribute to scholarship.[9]Matthias Küntzel of theCanadian Institute for the Study of Antisemitism, described the book as one "in which an author from the political left seeks to protect the dogmas of Western anti-Zionism from the reality of Arab antisemitism."[10] Writing forMondoweiss,Miriyam Aouragh reviewed it positively, calling it "a reasoned intervention that at once disputes anti-Arab racism and develops a strong set of arguments against the notion 'Arab anti-Semitism'."[11]
In theScottish Left Review, Achcar advocated for supplying weapons toUkraine amidstRussia's invasion of the country, writing,[12]
"[T]hose who advocate ‘peace’ while opposing the Ukrainians’ right to acquire weapons for their defence are counterposing peace to fighting. In other words, they are wishing for the capitulation of Ukraine – for which ‘peace’ could have resulted if the Ukrainians had not been armed and hence not been able to defend their country?"
In December 2022, Achcar proposed pressuringChina to coerce Russia into stopping the invasion. Activist Jean Vogel criticized Achcar, arguing that China's involvement would compromise Ukraine's political independence.[13]
