The Strong Horse: Power, Politics, and the Clash of Arab Civilizations

by Lee Smith

In this provocative and timely book, Middle East expert Lee Smith overturns long-held Western myths and assumptions about the Arab world, offering advice for America's future success in theregion.
Seeking the motivation behind the September 11 attacks, Smith moved to Cairo, where he discovered that the standard explanation--a clash of East and West--was simplynot the case. Middle East conflicts have little to do with Israel, the United States, or the West in general, but are endemic to the region. According to Smith's "Strong Horse Doctrine," theArab world naturally aligns itself with strength, power, and violence. He argues that America must be the strong horse in order to reclaim its role there, and that only by understanding the nature of the region'sancient conflicts can we succeed.
Smith details the three-decades-long relationship between Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and the United States, and gives a history of the MuslimBrotherhood, which would likely play an important role in the formation of a new government in Egypt. He also discusses Lebanon, where tipping the balance against Hezbollah in favor of pro-democracy, pro-US forces hasbecome imperative, as a special tribunal investigates the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri.
Eye-opening and in-depth, "The Strong Horse "is muchneeded background and perspective on today's headlines.

"From the Trade Paperback edition."

Genres: Nonfiction, History, Middle East, Politics, Islam, Religion, Cultural

259 pages, Kindle Edition

First published December 15, 2009

About the author

Lee Smith is a veteran journalist whose work appears in Real Clear Investigations, the Federalist, and Tablet. He’s worked in media for thirty years, writing about national politics, foreign policy, and the press. Smith reported from the Middle East for a decade after the 9/11 attacks and wrote the critically acclaimed The Strong Horse: Power, Politics, and the Clash of Arab Civilizations. A Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, Smith is a frequent guest on television and radio, national and international, including Fox News, CNN, and France 24. Smith was born in San Juan, Puerto Rico and was raised in New York City. He now lives in Washington, DC.

There is more than one author with this name

Reviews

[Sabrina Soffer · Rating 4 out of 5]

If conflict in the Middle East is eternal, by virtue of the strong horse dynamic of history, can there ever be peace? The word “peace” these days, as conflict in the Levant and its neighbors rages on, is elusive. However, this book provides tremendous insight as to how the Western notion of peace as opposed to that in the Orient is perceived. This dissonance leads to frequent policy mistakes and misunderstandings.

The beginning of the book taps into the philosophies and post colonial study that has shaped the study of the Middle East, and how public figures have erred in their assessments on the region. Smith provokes thought about philosophies of cultural relativism, and how to weigh them.

While I wish Smith’s work was a bit more expansive on how Europe, Russia, and China have played a role in the Middle East, and detailed more of Iran’s history alongside its current axis partners, Lee Smith’s Strong Horse written in 2010 is always timely—especially in today’s post Oct. 7 world. The Arab tribal, power-driven mindset, as he argues, is an eternal facet of its society. Smith makes the clear that this mindset is not inherently conflict hungry, but is merely an index of its human nature. And that is something Westerners don’t seem to understand.

Imposing notions of democracy and projecting moral values onto the Middle East will take us years back in the “peace process,” as has been the case for decades. “Peace” in the Arab world is merely a fragile balance of power waiting to crack rather than a loving and kind regional order shaped by shared values. If the US and Israel are just battlefields whereby Arab groups battle out their internal clash of civilizations—how do we stop this self-destruction? Or should the West even try? Whose role is it? On these questions, I am still unsure.

Through the countries and characters Smith introduces, their histories and thoughts, I walk away more hopeless about the prospect of Middle East peace—now, I feel the need to discard the word “peace” from my lexicon when discussing the Middle East. I have set this book back on my shelf believing that peace in the way Westerners think about peace may not be attainable. But stability, on the other hand, can be, should be what we strive for under a strong horse that can harmonize the region based on shared interests and act as the region’s Machiavelli. And thankfully, this war of Swords & Iron leaves Israel to step up to the plate.

But Israel’s strong horse position will not stop conflicts in the region. And we may not be able to stop conflicts, but mitigate them. This mitigation may lead to more realistic assessments and policy prescriptions like the Abraham Accords where even once shared interests were met, some glimmers of peace by marrying shared faith attributes emerged. This should be our horizon of hope.

[Kraychik · Rating 4 out of 5]

Easy light reading that provides a basic wake up to the uninitiated: not all cultures and societies share the same values. It'd be preferable if Lee Smith was actually an Arab and/or Muslim who had a deeper insight into these cultures and societies via his upbringing, but he still has the honesty and curiosity to open up some eyes. If you're a cultural relativist or socialist/communist utopian, steer clear of this book lest if shatter some of your illusions and distress you.

[Sonia · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a really good read for those wanting to know more about the internal dynamics of the Middle East. Its well researched and covers a wide expanse of dimensions from the teachings of the Islam to current day politics. The book is fast paced and a relatively easy read for a subject so complex. I am not a very good reader, but this book had me engrossed completely.

[Rani Geha · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lee Smith does a good job analyzing the Arab world's problems. Having read the book four years after it was published, I was impressed to see how prescient it was regarding the developments in Syria, the Iranian nuclear program, and the Gulf states' reaction to America's realignment. Highly recommended book.

[Justin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book. It's really nice to see someone give an accurate, honest portrayal of how things operate in such a tumultuous part of the world, bettering our chances of moving forward meaningfully with realistic expectations.

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very well written with a good (intimately informed outsider) point of view, this book presents a simple yet intuitively sound premise that the Arab world (and thus Islam) is driven by tribal competition (with the West then being just another competitive - albeit outside - tribe), where it's the 'strong horse' that gets the respect and power.

"The United States is hated not because of what it does, or because of what it is. The United States is hated for what it is not, not Arab and not Muslim. America plays the part of the utterly alien force that puts the Arabs at existential risk unless they cohere as one. The United States is the most powerful embodiment of the non-Arab other, and as any tribe is galvanized by the present threat of its rivals, anti-Americanism is the easiest method available to consolidate the Arabs and create consensus. Fear of the outsider clarifies Arabism, and war against him unifies the whole - or, in Nasser's formulation, "No voice louder than the cry of battle."" (p. 55-56)

and,

"The gap between the West and the Orient is not geographical, rather, it is a rift between two world views, where the first is an open and freee society that cannot help but constantly reevaluate and investigate its own premises, leading it to prize the empiricism and quest for the new that propel technological innovation, while the second is a culture that draws red lines around authority - political, religious, cultural and even familial - as a mater of habit." (p. 127)

and,

"The battle lines in the Middle East's war of ideas are drawn over this simple question: Should the Arabs reject or accept the values that are the building blocks of political and technological modernity? In effect, the Americans had taken the wrong side in the debate in failing to see that the manifestations of a free society, including democracy, are its flower and not its root. Liberalism and liberal reform are the work not of technology but of real human beings, men and women with a stake in their own societies..." (p. 140)

Mostly Smith's account is aimed at presenting serious, synthetic and insightful geo-political conclusions such as these, but the bulk of the book is actually his recounting of personal and very human anecdotes which often give rise to more subtle human insights, and this is what makes it so enjoyable to read.

"More often, it is women who must save men from themselves. Women do not veil to protect their own virtue, but to take responsibility for male desire." (p. 152)

and,

"When the old man stood, the meeting of the Mahfouz circle was done, Raouf put out his cigarette, then pulled an idea out of his ashtray. "Maybe the question is not what went wrong with Islam and the Arab," he said, "but what went right with the West." (p.157)

Although written 15 years ago, and even though only a thumbnail sized survey and summary of the many factors effecting issues of Middle East war, peace, culture and diplomacy, it's still as insightful, relevant and important as ever... 4+ stars.

[Richard Kravitz · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a very interesting read, although a bit dated. It focused mostly on Egypt, Lebanon and Syria's support for resistance / terrorism in the post-9/11 years.

But more importantly, it made a good argument, with case after case, showing the difference between the West and Arab Societies. And that Arab societies are not ready for or even desirious of functioning in a democratic manner. All they want is to fight and win, to be the "Strong Horse." That the problems in the Middle East are not because of the U.S., not becaue of Israel, not because of Colonialism, but are the product of the Arab societies that inhabit the area and their constant fighting for control of the reagion from EACH OTHER.

The way Arab countries function (or dysfunction) is a product of the societies and the values (and religion) they hold dear. They don't realize that the things we have in the West are an offshoot of the values and freedoms that our political order have created over decades and decades. They think that our prosperity, consumer goods and personal freedoms just materialize out of thin air. But they don't, they are the result of the sometimes painful personal and societal sacrifices that come from creating a just society. Something that Arab / Muslim countries are just not able to do, because deep down they do not want that. They respect only power and military victory.

This is especially cogent now with the war in Iran. My wife and many others say it is the IRGC that is bad, not the people. I disagree. The IRGC is in power because either the people want them there or have acquiesced to the existence of the regime and are not necessarily interested in the type of political change that western style democracy will bring to the region.

[cool breeze · Rating 4 out of 5]

After 9/11, Lee Smith spent eight years in the Middle East trying to figure out “why the Arabs hate us”. This book is the result. It is partly interviews and anecdotes, and partly analysis. In the end, Smith comes to the depressing conclusion that the Arabs are simply a backwards, savage, tribal culture. They respect nothing bur force - “the strong horse”. The majority do not want, and may never be ready for, what much of the world considers civilization. Some illustrative quotes:

“In the Middle East, political violence is not an anomaly. It is the normal state of affairs.”

“Globalization put the Arabs face-to-face with their contribution to modernity. . .. The Arabs did not contribute to its production, but only consumed it.”

“while all men may be entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of justice, they do not all seek it, for some, as the resistance proudly proclaims, love death more than life. Ultimately, the problem with the region was not the regimes, nor was it Islam, nor even the Islamists, but the Arab societies of which they were a part. . .. It was not that the Arabs were incapable of democracy but that most of them did not want it”

[Irfan Muhaimin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ada bahagian aku setuju dan ada yang tidak tapi kena faham bahawa penulis pro US semestinya ada bias.
Setujunya dalam perbicangan bahawa turunya Nabi
Muhammad pencetus kepada civilization dalam masyarakat arab yang kebanyakan hidup pagan.
Kejatuham kerajaan turki uthmaniyah telah runtuh sebahagian civilzation tersebut. Tapi yang tak berapa bersetuju menuduh gerakan Abduh sebagai kebelakang melalui salafist. Penulis banyak berpihak kepada kedudukan mesir berbanding saudi dan • katanya lagi Mesir dilihat menjadi titik untk keamanan tanah Arab. Ketika perang Israel - Arab, US tidak mahu terlibat secara langsung bahkan perancis banyak main peranan dalam menyediakan senjata. Dan kekalahan ( perang Arab menjadi Meir negara pertama melakukan damai. Perang dingin antara tanah arab memberi kelebihan kepada Israel secara langsung. Banyak perkara yang kurang disenangi dalam buku ini tapi masih bagus untuk difikirkan sejenak.

[Ray Simmons · Rating 5 out of 5]

An Eye-Witness View of Islamic Reality

It is easy to condemn or approve Islam based on our conservative or socialist ideology. I was impressed with this book which made nuanced judgment calls based on historical review and, more importantly, personal conversations with Islamic people inside and outside the Islamic governments. I recommend this book to all open minds to discover the real Islam and its philosophy of the Strong Horse.

[Aparna Bharadwaj · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good book, but the author centers around just one key idea and the book quickly gets repetitive. One wonders if there are counterpoints that should be offered, or more nuances to explore. Instead, we see a view that seems more and morw biased as the book progresses.

[Lissa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very interesting book about the history and philosophy of the Middle East. While somewhat dated now, the author is very knowledgable and the interplay of Western Europe and this region is well covered.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

"It is difficult for us to see that our form of political organization made us not the norm, but a privileged exception, the beneficiaries of a historical anomaly... We imagine that all men must have inherited essentially the same world that we have and are thus motivated by the same hopes and fears and ideas. In short, they are not. ...the problem with Arab democracy was not a lack of supply but a lack of demand.

"The American policy elite cherishes stability above all other values, and so it is apt to see stability on the verge of breaking out even in the unlikeliest of places. Unfortunately, the rest of the world is not always cooperative, nor does it agree that democracy is the highest and final stage in political organization.

"It was not that the Arabs were incapable of democracy but that most of them did not want it.... To be sure the Arabs wanted to choose their leaders--who does not?--but as for the accommodations and compromises between contending points of views, which is the signature of a democratic and secular society, these tenets had no foundation in a region where history has convinced people that there was always good reason to fear your neighbor.... So the Americans, who have trouble believing that anyone given the choice would not prefer to settle differences through peaceful means, through talk, were finally incapable of doing much for the Arabs."

[Kamran Haris · Rating 3 out of 5]

Its a good book, its very interesting and the format and structure of the writing allows it to be an capturing read, even for those who usually want stay away from the non-fiction areas of the bookshelves. However, a good portion of the book is based on subjective evidence and while it is interesting to read, what ultimately detracts from the validity of those arguments is the people who are being interviewed. This does not mean that the book is not interesting, or that I did not learn anything from it, rather it is a book that should be read, questioned, discussed but should not be primarily used as a text to understand the Middle East if its one of the only things you have read on the Middle East. In some discussions I had with Egyptians and Jordanians, some of the political contexts discussed appear to be more multi-faceted than the way they are discussed in the book. Still its a wonderful read and very interesting, so don't let my opinions scare you away from developing your own opinions of this book!

[Jo · Rating 4 out of 5]

I don't normally read this kind of book but my husband was thinking of studying Middle Eastern History and I thought this book sounded relevant and ended up reading it myself. I have been reading this over many months which has not helped in my grasp of the many different sects, countries and individuals involved but what I have taken from the book has been fascinating and eye opening. Although dense with information it is well written and provides much food for thought especially in light of recent events in Yemen, Egypt, Libya and particularly Syria. In fact I would be very interested to hear the authors opinions on these events and how they fit into the context of this book.
In short this book was a challenge for someone ill versed in this area but well worth the read.

[Srinivas]

The author seems to argue that the people in the Arab world don't care about individual liberty, democratically elected leaders, etc.,.

For quite sometime now, I had been wondering if things like "greater freedoms" are desired by people across all nations. Do the Chinese really crave for political freedom? Do we, Indians, really prefer a functional democracy over dynastic rule? We seem to prefer powerful families ruling for generations. And this is not limited just to politics; It's true when it comes to public support for movie stars too.
Through John Walker :http://www.fourmilab.ch/fourmilog/arc...

[Lindsey · Rating 3 out of 5]

I agreed with the premise but thought the book was lacking. The dust jacket lays out the argument more clearly than the actual text, which is organized and paced strangely. The only exception is Chapter 7 "The Schizophrenic Gulf" which articulates the problem of bringing technology to an area that doesn't have the values that would allow for the manufacture of technology. I was looking forward to his argument that the main cause of oppression comes not from the political level but the family level, but this argument wasn't fully realized.

[Jill]

I have set this aside - (because I can't find it!) However, I am taking it off of my currently reading list with concern that it may be a politically and/or culturally biased book. While I might be reading it critically, I don't want my book shelf to be loaded with one particular perspective - such as I don't only watch or read predominantely Republican or Democrat news, websites and books.

This would be the antithesis of what I am interested in - open perspectives leading to understanding and peace.

[Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was an interesting read...the author has a point of view and he makes a strong case for it. I’m not sure he’s right - but I will read other things better informed - and I will understand a bit better what is going on in the Middle East because of his insight. At the same time I think he is a bit myopic in not taking the larger picture, the larger world picture, into account as he looks at what is happening in this part of the world. All in all a good read. I’m glad I read it.

[Benjamin Glaser · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a very, very good and at the end an obvious introduction to the modern Middle East and the politics of Jihad and Arab Nationalism. Does a great job at showing the general naivete and ignorance of the intelligentsia, both left and right, because they each make the mortal failure of assuming that folks in the region reason as they do, and want the same things they do.

Highly Recommend.

[Chris · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting. First book on the middle east that has reached this conclusion(as far as I know) and it's refreshing to hear a different view (even if it's not a happy one)

His conclusions tend to feel more realistic than a lot of the others, and I can understand how this will be a hotly debated book.

I think he makes an excellent point.

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting book with thought-provoking ideas. I'm not very versed with Middle Eastern politics and The Strong Horse provided a great overview and conceptual framework of the politics in this region.

[Marc · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book left me conflicted because it was filled a lot of cultural gems of the region but reckless analysis that needed more depth at the same time. I learned quite a bit from the journalistic portions (meetings, encounters, cultural anecdotes) but did not find the book more useful beyond that.

[Jordan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Made my way through this in Jordan during summer '14, as things were just beginning to, on camera, brew anew. There's something to it; I'm holding to this as one of (many) possible kaleidoscope frameworks. And Smith makes it easy by interspersing anecdotes among the academic.

[Leonard · Rating 3 out of 5]

This survey of the history of power struggles in the middle east is a very pessimistic view of the possibility of peace. Dark. I think (or hope) it overstates its case.

[Margaret · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lots of cuts and pastes. Nothing new! Out of date.

[David Wasser · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very interesting and enlightening perspective on the Arab world, and how it approaches modernity. I learned a lot from this book

[Jon-Erik · Rating 3 out of 5]

He called it regarding Syria.

[Wagih]

good

[Jason · Rating 2 out of 5]

not as interesting as I thought it would be. Very dry...