What Really Went Wrong: The West and the Failure of Democracy in the Middle East

by Fawaz A. Gerges

An ambitious alternative history of the modern Middle East
 
What Really Went Wrong offers a fresh and incisive assessment of American foreign policy’s impact on the history and politics of the modern Middle East. Looking at flashpoints in Iranian, Egyptian, Syrian, and Lebanese history, Fawaz A. Gerges shows how postwar U.S. leaders made a devil’s pact with potentates, autocrats, and strongmen around the world. Washington sought to tame assertive nationalists and to protect repressive Middle Eastern regimes in return for compliance with American hegemonic designs and uninterrupted flows of cheap oil.
 
The book takes a counterfactual approach, asking readers to consider how the political trajectories of these countries and, by extension, the entire region may have differed had U.S. foreign policy privileged the nationalist aspirations of patriotic and independent Middle Eastern leaders and people. Gerges argues that rather than focusing on rolling back communism, extracting oil, and pursuing interventionist and imperial policies in Iran, Egypt, and beyond, postwar U.S. leaders should have allowed the Middle East greater autonomy in charting its own political and economic development. In so doing, the contemporary Middle East may have had better prospects for stability, prosperity, peace, and democracy.

Genres: Middle East, History, Politics, American History, Nonfiction

336 pages, Hardcover

First published June 25, 2024

Reviews

[Audrey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Looking at two case studies in-depth, the CIA overthrow of Iran’s democratic leader Mossadegh in 1953 and the antagonism towards Nasser leading to the 1956 Suez Crisis, this is a great analysis of the short sightedness of US foreign policy and its disregard for democracy in human rights (in the Middle East in particular but across many parts of the world), motivated by a confluence of virulent anti-communism and corporate greed. In the cases of Mossadegh and Nasser, the US did not recognise or think important that these were two nationalist leaders who wanted independence and sovereignty for their countries above all. Many opportunities for different outcomes were lost.

These are not all the reasons however: the view of the US in the Middle East was soured and became overwhelmingly negative (particularly with the same pattern in the war on terror, and the impunity given to Israel in its actions); the reign of the Shah following the coup against the popular elected leader Mossadegh could only be sustained through an iron fist and abuse of human rights, leading in many ways to the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the rise of clerical opposition to the Shah (as secular opposition had been largely attacked and its growth stifled over the preceding decades); and the defeat of Nasser’s semi-secular Arab nationalism and America’s support for the conservative Saudi royals paved the way for the rise of Islamist movements (as many saw the defeat of the Arab world in 1967 as punishment for the secular nationalism of Arab leaders). Most importantly, the need to both sustain unpopular rulers and prevent coups was a major factor that led to authoritarianism and clamping down on democracy and civil society. This has a legacy that continues in the Middle east today, and is not some intrinsic feature of the region (as per an orientalist racist view) but a specific confluence of historical events and their consequences. More in depth analysis of possibilities and more detail in certain sections would also have been welcome.

[M. MOUNIR · Rating 5 out of 5]

A WORTHY CONJECTURE

A well researched book. The big question can a conniving person who attains power without an election, hiding behind someone else and tasting the euphoria of rigged elections be given the benefit of noble intentions absent US malfeasance towards him. I strongly doubt that.
There is a French proverb that "with if you can put Paris in a bottle," so keep guessing or daydreaming.

[Cole Jensen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fawaz A. Gerges’s 2024 book, What Really Went Wrong: The West and the Failure of Democracy in the Middle East, challenges the notion that Middle Eastern culture and religion inherently resist democracy. Gerges argues that Western interventions, particularly by the U.S. and the U.K., have been the primary drivers of instability and failed democratic development in the region. He highlights how Western powers have repeatedly intervened to protect economic interests, such as oil, and punish leaders who do not align with their policies, preventing the Middle East from charting its own path.

Gerges uses Mossadegh’s Iran and Nasser’s Egypt to illustrate his argument. Gerges critiques the U.S. foreign policy of the Cold War, especially under figures like John Foster and Allen Dulles, who were zealous in their fight against communism. Gerges argues that Mossadegh and Nasser were not communists but were pushed toward the Soviet Union by the West’s refusal to cooperate with them. The book also examines the role of anti-colonialism and economic nationalism in the Middle East’s resistance to Western powers.

A central theme of the book is the missed opportunities for democracy in the Middle East and draws strong comparisons with the "Asian Tigers" (Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea), who cultivated successful democracies despite authoritarian pasts. However, he does the unique difference of the Middle East, especially the security threats posed by Israel that have further entrenched authoritarianism in the region.

While Gerges makes a compelling case for the role of Western intervention in the failure of democracy, he somewhat underplays the role of domestic political factors in shaping the Middle East’s development. Overall, the book provides valuable insights into the consequences of foreign intervention and the ongoing instability in the region, offering a refreshing critique of the idea that the Middle East’s instability is solely due to internal factors like culture and religion.