The plight of Iraqi Historians (Part 2)
I asked Professor Al-Bakka’ what had changed since the Americans’ entry into the city. He thought for awhile and then enumerated the courses that had been abolished (all more or less Baathist propaganda) and the courses that had been freshly created, such as those examining the history of Kurdistan or that of Shi’i thought. Then he said, “The Americans want to send our students and professors abroad for study on American scholarships. Should they go?”
I was surprised at the question. My first response was to think beyond ideology, and reply immediately,“Of course,“ I said,"They will be getting first-class educations”. Professor Al-Bakka’ was silent, and then he said, “There’s something else. Now the Americans want us to teach American Studies. I don’t understand that at all. We teach American history, for heaven’s sake, so why do we have to teach it again under a different guise?”.
I tried to explain that American Studies was, in some ways, a different approach, whose practitioners incorporated a larger definition for the field. The operational word, I explained, was" culture" but I was unsure as to whether American culture would be taught as an exceptionalist current in which the rise of American power was seen as all but inevitable, or as a historical phenomenon in which stress would be on laid on showing that world cultures had as much influence on America as America had on the rest of the world.
I don't know what approach was taken. However, I noticed that one of the subjects for which the newly-reopened Fulbright program was to recruit students for was in fact American Studies. I have full confidence that, left alone, the Fulbright program would take a more nuanced approach. But I wonder whether the ideologues in the CPA would leave this to chance. They haven't done so for practically everything else, so why should this be any different?
POSTSCRIPT: As of today, Tuesday 1rst of June 2004, Dr. Al-Bakka' is the new Minister of Higher Education in Iraq!