|
CounterPunch
November
13, 2002
Horseman Without
a Horse
Debate Rages Over an Egyptian TV Series
by LINDA HEARD
Egyptian blockbuster series, especially produced
for post-fast Ramadan evenings, are traditionally thought provoking.
Last year, the conversation in Egyptian homes and on Arabic network
talk shows centred around Hag Metwally, a rags-to riches tale
of a man who gathered wives along with increasing wealth. This
provoked the ire of many Arab women who felt that it encouraged
their husbands to practise polygamy. This year's Horseman without
a Horse has gone one step further.
Attracting worldwide controversy and
debate, from the man in the street to the higher echelons of
Washington, why has Horseman without a Horse stirred up so much
fuss?
Written and directed by veteran Egyptian
actor Mohammed Sobhi, Horseman without a Horse, while portraying
the adventurous life of Egyptian journalist Hafez Neguib, has
included scenes related to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion--a
document, which has been banned for half-a-century in most of
Europe and elsewhere.
Exposed as a forgery by the Russian courts
in 1993, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion purport to be the
minutes of a secret meeting between top members of world Jewry
who forge a plot to take over the world.
The Protocols were, in fact, written
by members of Tsar Nicholas II's secret police, in 1903 and as
much as 60 percent of the document is plagiarised from an anti-Semitic
French text.
Mohammed Sobhi, who also performs multiple
roles in the series, has publicly stated that while he admits
that The Protocols are forgeries, he believes that 19 of the
24 Protocols or 'minutes of a meeting' have actually transpired.
He also warns darkly that the remaining five could well be about
to come to fruition.
The idea that anything concerning The
Protocols would be shown on satellite television has enraged
the Israeli leadership, along with the powerful Anti Defamation
League, which took their case to Washington in an attempt to
block the broadcast.
A US Department of State spokesman responded
at Israel's behest by saying: "We have not viewed the programs,
but we have some concerns about the series. U.S. Ambassador to
Cairo David Welsh has met with senior Egyptian officials, including
Egyptian Minister of Information Safwat Al Sherif to raise our
concerns..."
This was followed by a letter of protest
addressed to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, signed by 46 members
of Congress.
The Arab world could surely be forgiven
if it doesn't find a certain tragic irony here. At a time when
men, women and children are being killed every day in the Occupied
Territories and Israel--both Israeli and Palestinian--the US
government risks losing any credibility it has left in the region
by displaying far more concern about the content matter of a
television programme than getting the peace process back on track.
Behind the scenes, the US has been doing
some arm-twisting, but the reaction of Egyptian Foreign Minister
Ahmed Maher was to dig in his heels and reaffirm that the series
is not, in fact, anti-Semitic, adding that in any case Egypt
would not cave in to political pressure especially when it comes
to internal affairs.
Followers of the debate held their breath
on the day of the first scheduled showing of Horseman without
a Horse, to see whether the Egyptian government would back down
at the eleventh hour.
In the event, most Egyptians were relieved
to see that their government had not been threatened by Washington's
hints at cutting the US$2 billion plus aid awarded to Egypt annually.
Sobhi's series has now evolved into a cause celebre among the
Egyptian public, a symbolism of Egyptian nationalism and sovereign
independence.
But not all Egyptians and Arabs feel
the same way. Magdi el-Hussein, who has researched Neguib's life,
has said that the journalist did not mention either Jews or The
Protocols in his diaries upon which the production of Horseman
was based. He further urged Safwat el-Sherif to take the series
off-air.
A guest on CNN's Your World Today programme,
Mamoun Fandy, a professor of Middle East studies, accused Mohammed
Sobhi of being an anti-Semite, adding ominously that Sobhi was
a frequent guest of President Saddam Hussein of Iraq. He further
blamed the Egyptian director and actor for including The Protocols
in his series in an attempt to sensationalise for the purpose
of material gain.
It is certainly understandable why Israelis
and Jews in the Diaspora are deeply disturbed by any portrayal
of the forgery. The 20th century's most notorious and evil leader
Adolph Hitler quoted from The Protocols, in his autobiography
Mein Kampf, citing its contents as one of the pretexts for perpetrating
the Holocaust.
For Jews, The Protocols epitomise anti-Semitic
attitudes, once prevalent in the Soviet Union and Europe, attitudes,
which led to Russian pogroms and the death at the hands of the
Nazis of six million of their ancestors. However, the recent
demonstration by Jewish groups outside the Egyptian Embassy in
Washington, and their appeals to Washington to intervene, have
only served to defeat their real object--ensuring that The Protocols
are consigned to obscurity.
Due to the ensuing diplomatic wrangles
between the US and Egypt, the almost forgotten Protocols--which
prior to the recent dispute were only accessible to most Westerners
on Racist and anti-Semitic websites--are eliciting renewed interest
around the world. Arab bookshops cannot keep up with the demand,
the Internet talk-boards are buzzing, while the curious are downloading
copies from the Web.
Singers and bands are often delighted
when their singles and videos are banned by mainstream television
and radio as this is a sure fire route to their work topping
the charts. Controversy surrounding books too, such as Salman
Rushdie's mediocre Satanic Verses, ensures that authors gain
a phenomenal readership.
Israel and Washington, therefore, have
shot themselves in their collective feet. At the same time most
Arabs view the American government's interference as yet another
attempt to dominate, control and manipulate the Arab world even
down to what Arabs should view and think. It also serves to confirm
their fears that Israel may be leading Washington by the nose.
Arabs and their leaders see little reason to kowtow to Jewish
sensitivities during this climate of mutual hatred.
Supporters of the series also bristle
at what they call the hypocrisy of the 'Land of the Free', which,
while ostensibly lauding its own uncensored media, demands that
the Egyptian government should peremptorily censor the privately
owned network, which produced the series--Dream TV.
It would surely have been more prudent
for Jewish groups as well as the Israeli and American governments
if they had kept their concerns to themselves. Their official
complaints have shone a spotlight onto what would otherwise have
passed by unnoticed.
Although some eight million Egyptian
pounds were spent on making the series, which boasts some spectacular
costumes and sets, the acting in the first three episodes was
abysmal with some of the actors behaving like pantomime players.
Although it must be said that Sobhi's thespian skills have yet
to figure large, the series is hardly a dramatic production,
which would have received global attention on its own merits,
especially since it is not subtitled in English.
Given that The Protocols are these days
recognised as forgeries by everyone, including Arabs, their depiction,--although
admittedly far from being flattering to Jews--should be put into
a proper perspective. Mohammed Sobhi has only committed what
American and Israeli movie directors and scriptwriters have done
since the beginning of cinema, crude stereotyping.
Horseman without a Horse not only shows
Jews in a bad light, it does the same with Turks and the British.
The Ottoman rulers of Egypt are portrayed as spoilt, selfish
and cruel while the British fare little better. We have yet to
see Turkish and British protestors outside Egyptian embassies
and eliciting backing from the White House.
Perhaps Horseman represents decades of
pent up Arab frustration. Arabs know more than anyone what it
feels like to be misrepresented, negatively stereotyped and vilified
in both Hollywood and Israeli movies as well as on Western television
screen. They have been portrayed variously as connivers, liars,
thieves and terrorists.
When has an Arab ever been the hero of
an American-made film? They are more likely to be shown with
a dagger between the teeth, kidnapping Western women to grace
their harems, or brandishing a deadly weapon.
If Arab countries had sought to manufacture
diplomatic incidents every time their countrymen had been slandered
by Western television, East-West relations would have been characterized
by a cold war for decades.
In the event that Arabs and Moslems were
to mirror Israeli and Jewish reactions to real or perceived slights,
then they should also be demonstrating outside US embassies due
to the anti-Islamic remarks made by right-wing Christian television
preachers Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. Fox TV anchors also
appear to be making a career out of hurling insults at the Arab
world these days, while venerating Israel.
This isn't the first diplomatic incident,
which has been prompted by a television programme. In 1979, Saudi
Arabia expelled the British ambassador after the airing of Death
of a Princess in Britain. Margaret Thatcher, the British Prime
Minister of the day, attempted to prevent the broadcast of the
film, but democratic principles took precedence over diplomacy,
as, surely, they should in a democracy.
The bottom line is that while Horseman
without a Horse will come and go, eventually fading in the memories
of its viewers, the divide between the Arab world and Israel
is growing.
This is not due to anti-Semitism, religious
hatred or racism on the part of Arabs whose forefathers once
lived peaceably alongside their Jewish neighbours. The bitterness
is caused by events on the ground in Israel. No amount of protests
from Tel Aviv and Washington and no amount of censorship can
bring a rapprochement between the two sides.
Only justice for the Palestinian people
can hope to change the status quo for the better. Horseman without
a Horse is a mere inconsequential red herring serving to divert
attention from an increasingly ugly reality.
Linda Heard
is a writer, editor and Arabist, who has lived and worked for
most of her life in the Middle East.
She can be reached at: freenewsreport@yahoo.com
Yesterday's
Features
Jeremy Scahill
Live
from Baghdad
Trading with the Enemy
Fran Shor
Crow's Return:
Auguries of Decay and Death
Scott Cossette
To Serve
or Not to Serve?
From Marine to Anti-War Organizer
Jason Leopold
Gray Davis' Trail of Broken Promises
Robert Fisk
Bush Crosses
the Rubicon
Ron Jacobs
UN Security
Council Vote:
Why Don't I Feel More Secure?
Brian Rainey
Bush's
Motives in Iraq
Tarif Abboushi
Cartoons and the Messianic Age
New
Print Edition of CounterPunch Available Exclusively
to Subscribers:
- The Shafts of Death: Bush, Coal Mines, and Death
in the Tunnels;
- Speak Memory!: Carter and the Draft;
- Daniel Pipes' World: Smearing Pro-Arab Academics;
- Ashcroft's Gays: the War on Free Speech;
- Saddam's Amnesty: Could It Happen Here?
- Criminalizing Dissent: a history and preview;
- Iraq 1987: When the Going Was Good;
- Egypt in Turmoil: an Anthropologist's Account;
- Green and Grounded: Profiled at the Gate.
Remember, the CounterPunch website is
supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide
web audience is soaring , with about seven million hits a month
now. This is inspiring, but the work involved also compels us
to remind you more urgently than ever to subscribe and/or make
a (tax deductible) donation if you can afford it. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe
Now!
Or Call Toll Free 1 800 840 3683
home / subscribe
/ about us
/ books
/ archives
/ search
/ links
/
|