Minorities and the Modern Arab World: New Perspectives

Other titles from Middle East Studies Beyond Dominant Paradigms

Artisan Entrepreneurs in Cairo and Early-Modern Capitalism (1600–1800)

Nelly Hanna

Gender and Class in the Egyptian Women’s Movement, 1925–1939: Changing Perspectives

Cathlyn Mariscotti

The Large Landowning Class and the Peasantry in Egypt, 1837–1952

Raouf Abbas and Assem El-Dessouky

Militant Women of a Fragile Nation

Malek Abisaab

Native Tongue, Stranger Talk: The Arabic and French Literary Landscapes of Lebanon

Michelle Hartman

Pragmatism in Islamic Law: A Social and Intellectual History

Ahmed Fekry Ibrahim

The Shi‘ites of Lebanon: Modernism, Communism, and Hizbullah’s Islamists

Rula Jurdi Abisaab and Malek Abisaab

Unveiling the Harem: Elite Women and the Paradox of Seclusion in Eighteenth-Century Cairo

Mary Ann Fay

Copyright © 2016 Syracuse University Press

Syracuse, New York 13244-5290

All Rights Reserved

First Edition 2016

16 17 18 19 20 21     6 5 4 3 2 1

∞ The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992.

For a listing of books published and distributed by Syracuse University Press, visit www.SyracuseUniversityPress.syr.edu.

ISBN: 978-0-8156-3452-2 (cloth)               978-0-8156-3433-1 (paperback)

978-0-8156-5355-4 (e-book)

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Robson, Laura, author.

Title: Minorities and the modern Arab world : new perspectives / edited by Laura Robson.

Description: First edition. | Syracuse, New York : Syracuse University Press, 2016. | Series: Middle East studies beyond dominant paradigms | This volume originated in a conference held at the Middle East Studies Center at Portland State University in 2013, Minorities of the Modern Middle East.—Acknowledgments page. | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2016010724| ISBN 9780815634522 (cloth : alk. paper) | ISBN 9780815634331 (pbk. : alk. paper) | ISBN 9780815653554 (e-book)

Subjects: LCSH: Minorities—Arab countries—Congresses.

Classification: LCC DS36.9.A1 M55 2016 | DDC 305.0917/4927—dc23 LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2016010724

Manufactured in the United States of America

Contents

Acknowledgments

Introduction

LAURA ROBSON

PART ONE: Conceptualizing Minorities

1.From Millet to Minority

Another Look at the Non-Muslim Communities in the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries

PETER SLUGLETT

2.Across Confessional Borders

A Microhistory of Ottoman Christians and Their Migratory Paths

JACOB NORRIS

3.Becoming a Sectarian Minority

Arab Christians in Twentieth-Century Palestine

LAURA ROBSON

4.Egypt and Its Jews

The Specter of an Absent Minority

JOEL BEININ

PART TWO: Minorities, Nationalism, and Cultural Authenticity

5.When Anticolonialism Meets Antifascism

Modern Jewish Intellectuals in Baghdad

ALINE SCHLAEPFER

6.Assyrians and the Iraqi Communist Party

Revolution, Urbanization, and the Quest for Equality

ALDA BENJAMEN

7.The Struggle over Egyptianness

A Case Study of the Nayruz Festival

HIROKO MIYOKAWA

8.From Minority to Majority

Inscribing the Mahra and Touareg into the Arab Nation

SAMUEL LIEBHABER

PART THREE: Minorities in the Transnational Sphere

9.Tunisia’s Minority Mosaic

Constructing a National Narrative

DAVID BOND

10.Majority and Minority Languages in the Middle East

The Case of Hebrew in Mandate Palestine

LIORA R. HALPERIN

11.The Chaldean Church between Iraq and America

A Transnational Social Field Perspective

YASMEEN HANOOSH

12.Permanent Temporariness in Berlin

The Case of an Arab Muslim Minority in Germany

LUCIA VOLK

Notes

Bibliography

List of Contributors

Index

Acknowledgments

ANY BOOK REPRESENTS a collective effort, but this is perhaps especially true of an edited volume encompassing the work of a number of participants. It is a pleasure to acknowledge the many people whose help and support made this collection possible.

This volume originated in a conference held at the Middle East Studies Center at Portland State University in 2013, Minorities of the Modern Middle East. I thank my workshop co-organizer, Yasmeen Hanoosh, and the then director of the center, James Grehan, for their hard work putting the event together. The center’s staff members Elisheva Cohen, Karen Lickteig, and Tam Rankin provided invaluable assistance, and the conference received funding from the Portland State University Speakers Board and the Internationalization Minigrant Program. Further sponsorship came from the Portland State University Departments of History and World Languages and Literatures and from the Portland Center for Public Humanities.

Besides the contributors to this volume, the conference’s other participants were centrally important to shaping the conversation and helping to clarify the ideas that appear here. I would like to thank Juan Cole, Jennifer Dueck, Lina Khatib, Roberto Mazza, Laila Prager, Paul Silverstein, Keith Walters, and Keith Watenpaugh for their participation and incisive comments during the course of the conference and its aftermath.

Syracuse University Press has been an enthusiastic and involved publisher, providing invaluable editorial support and assistance throughout the process. I thank Deanna McCay and Suzanne Guiod for their editorial acumen and commitment to the project. I also thank the two anonymous readers for the press, whose thoughtful and thorough reviews much strengthened the final version.

Introduction

LAURA ROBSON

In 1947 British Lebanese scholar Albert Hourani—later to be famous as the author of Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age and A History of the Arab Peoples—published a slender volume entitled Minorities in the Arab World, in which he attempted to outline the histories and characteristics of the religious, linguistic, and ethnic minorities in the Ottoman Empire’s former Arab provinces. He defined minority quite simply, as a community that was either non-Sunni Muslim or non-Arabic-speaking or both, existing within a Sunni Arab majority, and with a long-standing presence in the region (thereby excluding Ashkenazi Jewish settlers in Palestine). There were, he explained, a number of communities which have long resided in these countries, or in other parts of the Middle East before they came to these countries, and most of whose members possess their legal nationality, but which are not Sunni Moslem by faith, although they are Arabic-speaking; there are others which are Sunni Moslem but not Arabic-speaking, and others again which are neither Sunni nor Arab. It is to these communities that the term ‘minorities’ refers.¹

This idea that minorities in the Middle East are clearly identifiable, separate, long-standing communities persisted for many decades, even as scholars began to acknowledge the flexible nature of such communal categorizations. As Gabriel Ben-Dor put it in 1999, The authentic ethnic approach . . . emphasizes both the dynamics of change in ethnic identity and consciousness and the more or less objective variables that define majorities and minorities, which tend to endure over time.² Equally long-lived has been Hourani’s approach to defining the primary characteristics of these minorities, who are described by their theological systems first and their linguistic-national attributes second. His Christian minorities are characterized by their theological points of origination: the Eastern patriarchates’ split from Rome in the eleventh century, the Nestorian controversies over the nature of the Trinity in the fifth century, the Monophysite doctrines about the oneness of Christ and Jesus. Muslim minorities appear as defined by the Sunni-Shi‘i split over the caliphate in the seventh century, by the ‘Alawi belief in a Divine Triad, by the Druze theology of transmigration of souls. Similarly, Hourani’s linguistic minorities are sorted by the strengths of their claims to nationality: the Armenians have a continuous history as a national entity in this homeland since ancient times, while the Kurds have a group of dialects spoken by a number of Moslem tribes, scarcely united enough to be called a nation.³ This approach to the question of minorities in the Arab world dominated the public perception of non-Muslim and non-Arab communities in the region for decades and sometimes entered into a public realm already primed to view Sunni Islam as a monolithic entity engaged in various forms of institutionalized discrimination against non-Muslim or non-Arab communities.

But over the past twenty years, a new picture of minorities in the Arab world has begun to emerge in the scholarly literature—one that eschews the picture of static, clearly defined, predetermined minorities in a permanent state of tense relations with an equally predetermined Sunni Arab majority. Increasingly, scholars have begun to think about the modern phenomenon of minorities as the consequence of a process of minoritization, beginning in the late nineteenth century and continuing to unfold through the present day.⁴ Rather than offering a definition of minority, then, the chapters in this volume seek to examine the processes by which minority identities in the Arab world have been constantly formed, practiced, and altered. They challenge the idea that ethnic, religious, and linguistic minorities stand permanently outside majoritarian states across the Arab world. Collectively, these essays make three central arguments: that the category of minority became meaningful only with the rise of the modern nation-state; that in this new political landscape, groups labeled minorities often sought simultaneously to project an essential cultural authenticity and a nationalist commitment through specific and focused types of political engagement; and that Middle Eastern and North African minority identities owe much of their modern self-definition to developments within diaspora populations and other transnational frameworks.

The Historical Development of the Minority Concept

The concepts of minority and majority were essentially meaningless in the context of the Ottoman Arab world before the nineteenth century. In late Ottoman practice, Christian and Jewish communities in the Arab provinces were categorized as millets, a word indicating a non-Muslim community that had the right to a certain degree of communal autonomy (most centrally, separate courts for issues of personal law like marriage, divorce, and inheritance), in return for certain institutionalized disadvantages (like special taxes). This system, which had been highly localized and unevenly applied through the empire in earlier periods, underwent a process of institutionalization and centralization in the context of empirewide political, economic, and military reforms in the mid-nineteenth century, though it was still practiced and interpreted in variable and locally conscious ways. This move toward institutionalizing the millet system meant that the Ottoman state now identified and differentiated certain religious communities in more formalized ways. It did not, however, map those communal distinctions onto a state framework of political rights. As Aron Rodrigue has put it, Nothing in the political system of the Ottoman Empire called for different groups to merge into one. . . . That particular arrangement, therefore, renders invalid all our terms for debate about minority/majority, which are all extraordinarily Europe-centered.⁵ The Ottoman Empire’s rule depended not on claims to represent its subject population, but on political and military will and on claims to religiously sanctioned power.

The idea of minorities (and, for that matter, majorities) arose outside the Middle East, in a post-Enlightenment Europe where the desirability of assimilating identifiably separate internal communities into a theoretically universalist nation-state framework became a paramount concern. By the nineteenth century, these ideas were beginning to make their way into the Ottoman sphere. Under political, military, and economic pressure from the European imperial powers, the Ottoman state’s series of reforms known as the tanzimat began to make nods toward the concept of representation and to move toward a national political identity. This development coincided and interacted with the rise of nationalist and separatist movements on the edges of the empire—particularly in the Balkans, where political nationalism was often organized and deployed through Orthodox church institutions, thus fusing political opposition to the Ottoman state not only with irredentist national feeling but also with Christian institutional self-definition. At the same time, Ottoman military losses in Europe and the dispossession and expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Muslims following nationalist rebellions in places like Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Macedonia made for a demographic shift within the empire toward what was for the first time a definitive and overwhelming Muslim numerical majority.⁶ This shift also saw a move on the part of the Ottoman authorities toward the use of Islam as a unifying concept representing the empire, moving away from earlier Ottoman imaginings of the polity as essentially pluralistic.⁷

In the late nineteenth century, early European colonialism in North Africa began to develop the concept of treating certain communities as minorities, with differentiated sets of political rights and types of representation vis-à-vis the state. In Algeria, which the French occupied in the 1830s and declared legally a part of France in 1848, colonial governments began to investigate the possibilities of bestowing special citizenship rights on Algerian Jews. In 1870 the French Jewish lawyer Adolphe Crémieux—a longtime advocate for the rights of Jews in Europe and the founder of the Alliance Israélite Universelle—successfully pushed through what became known as the Crémieux Decree, which gave French citizenship to approximately thirty-five thousand native Jews in Algeria without altering the second-class indigenous status held by Algerian Muslims and Berbers.⁸ This decision foreshadowed decades of colonial decision making across North Africa and the Middle East that would tie religious community to political representation via a minority-majority framework.

Even by the 1920s, though, the term minority had not become common currency in the ex-Ottoman provinces. Rather, it emerged as a central concept in European discussions of these territories, and especially in the discourse and organization of the League of Nations. The international framework of minorities treaties, begun with the promulgation of the Polish minority rights agreement in 1919, marked the beginning of a new phase of international political jockeying in which the minority-majority distinction would be central to definitions of citizenship and sovereignty. The mandate system offered the opportunity (and, in many cases, the incentive) to clearly define ethnic and religious minorities and majorities in the new Arab states being folded into a colonial system. And once these categories were in place as institutionalized conduits to national and international representation, groups that had hitherto not thought of themselves as minorities began to claim that status on a global stage.

Following the First World War, much of the Arab world was brought under European colonial occupation. The postwar treaties created the newly defined states of Syria, Lebanon, Transjordan, Iraq, and Palestine, declaring them mandates under British or French authority. Technically, these new mandate states and their European rulers fell under the international jurisdiction of the League of Nations and were supposed to be moving toward eventual sovereignty. In practice, they were mostly governed as additions to the British and French colonial empires.⁹ In this context, both the British and the French mandate governments across the region made use of practices of ethnic, religious, and communal categorization that they had developed in other imperial contexts, creating new paths for religious identity to carry legal, political, and administrative implications. The new British mandate government in Palestine, bound by international agreement to encourage mass European Jewish immigration there, created new, separate legal institutions for Muslim, Christian, and Jewish subjects, thereby carefully dividing the Arab population along sectarian lines and making possible the emergence of state-like institutions for the Yishuv.¹⁰ In Iraq British colonial officials hoped that careful alliances with Sunni urban elites who had constituted a political leadership under the Ottomans would allow them to forestall the emergence of a secular Iraqi nationalism by firmly assigning the Iraqi Shi‘i communities a distinctly separate and generally unfavorable set of economic and political circumstances.¹¹ French interests drew the new Lebanese borders with the specific intent of engineering a particular demographic mix of Christians and Muslims, on the theory that Lebanese Christians would need to ally with the French in order to maintain political control over the country and emerge as the region’s only Christian-dominated nationstate.¹² The French mandate government in Lebanon consistently privileged Christian communities over either Sunni or Shi‘i voices through discriminatory practices of educational funding, government hiring, and political representation.¹³ In Syria minoritization took on a physical aspect, as the French mandate government drew borders between Sunni, ‘Alawi, and Druze statelets and declared them separate, communally determined political units. French mandate policy also encouraged a sectarianization process in the military, which by the 1930s was primarily made up of ‘Alawis and other non-Sunni populations and thereby took on a minority association. Egypt, while not under mandate supervision, remained under a strong British colonial influence and military presence throughout the interwar period and experienced a similar politicization of its Coptic community, treated as a distinct legal, administrative, and political entity.¹⁴

This heavy-handed process of colonial sectarianization met with considerable resistance from both sides of the minority-majority divide, particularly among urban elite and middle-class populations committed to emerging concepts of secular nationalism. In Palestine Arab Christian journalists, activists, and writers insisted that they were not a minority but full and committed members of a vibrant Palestinian Arab nationalism. Coptic leaders in Egypt similarly resisted the label of minority, proclaiming their commitment to Egyptian nationalism and placing their community at the center of Egyptian historical identity. In Syria the fragility of the French hold became apparent in 1925 when a Druze uprising in the southern province of Jabal Druze quickly became a mass rebellion against French imperial rule that included Muslim, Christian, and Druze communities and lasted for more than two years.¹⁵ In Morocco French attempts to isolate the Berber community through the imposition of a customary legal code (the dahir) to apply only to Berber communities and regions met with considerable resistance from Moroccan nationalists, both Berber and Arab, who saw this development as an imperial attempt at divide and rule and protested accordingly.¹⁶ Nevertheless, legal codification of sectarian identities reified and hardened communal divides across the region, as colonial subjects found themselves trying to carve out political, economic, and social opportunities for themselves in very restricted circumstances.

Further, there were some minorities for whom this colonial sectarianization process seemed to open up new political opportunities. Ethnolinguistic minorities who had suffered displacement during the war—particularly Armenian and Assyrian populations, who had been victims of genocidal massacres and mass deportations from 1915 on—saw in the new European focus on minorities an opportunity for national statehood, or at least some form of local autonomy. Engaged with a large and vocal diaspora population, Armenian and Assyrian communities argued in the international sphere that they could not be successfully integrated with hostile Muslim and Arab majorities. Their appeals to international Christian opinion, aligned with emerging humanitarian organizations like Near East Relief and the Red Cross, helped to solidify a narrative of ethnic Christian minorities persecuted by Muslim Arab majorities, a message warmly received by Western audiences who donated enormous amounts of money to their cause. Similarly, British colonial support for Zionist settlement in Palestine opened up the specter of an ethnoreligious minority hoping to alter the demographic realities on the ground to become a majority, with the support of the British mandate government, practical help from the European Jewish diaspora, and political assistance from the international community in the form of the League of Nations.

The minoritization process unfolded on two levels in the interwar period: on the ground, in the context of colonial governments committed to sectarianization, and in the international sphere, as ideas of minority rights and communal nationalisms mingled with older European concepts of Muslim and Arab despotism in an emerging international legal regime dominated by the League of Nations. Following the collapse of the mandates system in the 1940s and the emergence of a series of unstable postcolonial governments across the region in the 1950s, the situation for minority communities took on a new color. The states that eventually emerged in Egypt, Syria, and Iraq were all secularist national regimes under authoritarian leadership. In the cases of Syria and Iraq, they were dominated by a small and insular group of people who shared a sectarian and regional affiliation (Latakian and ‘Alawi in the case of Asad’s Syria, Sunni and Tikriti in Saddam Husayn’s Iraq), lending a degree of minority shading to what were avowedly secular pan-Arab regimes. Across the Mashriq, questions of pan-Arabism gave rise to new conversations about what constituted Arab identity and how minorities fitted into it. In Egypt, dominated by a secular nationalist authoritarian regime that sought to accommodate certain aspects of Islamist thought to preempt opposition, Coptic leaders struggled to articulate their nationalist commitment to the state. In other parts of North Africa, Arab nationalism competed with visions of Mediterranean cosmopolitanism and Berber separatism as exclusionary nationalisms emerged out of the toppled British and French empires.

In this secularist but often highly identitarian era, many Christian and Jewish intellectuals across the region found themselves drawn to leftist movements. Palestinian and Lebanese Christians dominated the Marxist-oriented Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine; the first Arabs in the Communist Party in Israel were Christians, who continued to be the dominant Arab element in the party until its split in 1965; the leftist opposition in Iraq and Syria was similarly disproportionately Christian. Around the same time, as the economic and political failures of these regimes became increasingly evident following the 1967 war and into the economic doldrums of the 1970s, the rise of Islamist political organizations contributed to a further sectarianization of the political landscape.

This period saw a significant engagement with questions of minoritization from diaspora groups, some of which were intent on demonstrating their essential separation from Muslim and Arab interests for purposes of easier assimilation within their new homelands in the United States and Europe.¹⁷ It also witnessed the rise of increasingly vocal Middle Eastern and North African immigrant communities in the West, who often suffered various forms of both institutionalized and informal discrimination and consequently began thinking of themselves, in explicit and self-conscious terms, as disenfranchised minorities. This trend was especially pronounced following the dual Palestinian disasters of 1948 and 1967; during and after the long Lebanese civil war that lasted, on and off, from 1975 until the Taif Accords of 1989; and among Iraqi Assyrians in the Detroit and Chicago areas in the 1990s and 2000s, following the first and second Gulf wars.

The movement from Ottoman rule through European colonial occupation through anti-Islamist, secularizing authoritarianism meant a shifting landscape of political, economic, and social affiliations that led some communities to strongly self-identify as national minorities, while others rejected the label in favor of incorporation and assimilation into other forms of political identity, from pluralistic nationalism to communism. The process by which minority identities were constructed and deconstructed has thus involved multiple levels of contact and confrontation with the state, international agencies, diaspora populations, and emerging secular and religious opposition elements, as well as internal negotiations.

In the current evolving situation across the Arab world, the position of minority communities is once again an open question, and the unfolding of revolutions and counterrevolutions appears in many places again to be reformulating religious and ethnic identities as essentially political. The ongoing sectarianization of the civil war in Syria, for instance, stands as a clear contemporary example of how economic, political, and military upheavals can reify or even create newly identifiable minority communities apparently at odds with majoritarian movements. The recent and continuing upheavals across the Arab world demonstrate the ongoing relevance of thinking about the mechanics of historical and political processes of minoritization in the modern era.

Chapters, Arguments, and Themes

The first part, Conceptualizing Minorities, comprises four chapters intended to shed light on the problems of defining the category of minority in the modern Arab world. It opens with Peter Sluglett’s essay, From Millet to Minority: Another Look at the Non-Muslim Communities in the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries, which investigates the expansion and remaking of the millet system through the nineteenth century into an institution that cast religious identity as simultaneously national and political. Sluglett argues that the millet system, which described the position of particular religious communities within the Ottoman context of a pluralistic imperial subject body, went through a period of expansion in the late nineteenth century that both reflected and institutionalized changes in ethnoreligious identifications occurring in the Balkans and the Arab provinces. In this period, religious communities were redefined both as nations of sorts—an idea with considerable European purchase, as Britain, France, and Russia all searched for ways to exert influence in the Ottoman state—and as minorities that represented a problem for majoritarian nationhood. With the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in the First World War, the additional problem arose of encompassing non-Arab and heterodox Muslim groups into states whose borders were defined largely by the external mandatory powers and whose political commitments were intended to be primarily nationalist. The movement from millet to minority constituted a series of specific local processes that changed religious communities from a flexible feature of the multiethnic Ottoman Empire to an often problematic component of the modern national states that succeeded it.

Jacob Norris, in his essay, Across Confessional Borders: A Microhistory of Ottoman Christians and Their Migratory Paths, fleshes out Sluglett’s argument, looking at a specific case study of precisely how the blurriness of communal categories played out in the lives of particular Ottoman Arab Christians. Following the life histories of two Arab Ottoman subjects, Roman Catholics from Bethlehem engaged in merchant activity that took them to Russia and France and back, Norris argues that denominational commitments were much less central and more flexible in the lives of mobile Levantine Christians than has often been thought. The trajectories, both geographical and cultural, of the merchant cousins Elias and Yaqub Kattan suggest that they viewed themselves as part of a pluralistic Arabic-speaking Ottoman Christianity that could find common currency (both figuratively and literally) with Arab Christians from other parts of the Ottoman Empire and belonging to other denominations and faiths.

My own chapter, Becoming a Sectarian Minority: Arab Christians in Twentieth-Century Palestine, looks at the transformation of these blurred and flexible visions of communal identities into hardened, formalized, institutionalized minorities under the auspices of the British colonial government in Palestine, suggesting that this was a process that occurred across the British and French mandate states during the interwar period. Sectarianism, and the recasting of nationalist Palestinian Arab Christians as a beleaguered minority, brought with it the advantage of dividing an Arab population unified by its simultaneous opposition to Zionist immigration and British rule. Even more centrally, it offered a legitimization of British rule over what was cast as a deeply divided society fractured by ancient and primitive religious disputes. These policies, I argue, were essentially adopted without much alteration into the new Israeli state, which early on began to govern its Palestinian Arab citizens as members of religious minorities.

The fourth chapter dealing with this theme, Joel Beinin’s Egypt and Its Jews: The Specter of an Absent Minority, examines the recent resurgence of interest in the historical experience of the Jewish community in Egypt. He suggests that this explosion of material—encompassing press coverage, fiction, and films, among other things—is not actually about the Jewish community at all, but represents a mode of talking about other issues. Most centrally, Beinin argues, this new discourse makes a veiled argument for some form of return to what is conceived as the more pluralistic, cosmopolitan, and democratic period of the Egyptian monarchy and cloaks concern for Coptic interests in stories ostensibly about Egyptian Jews. Such uses of minority historical narratives in service of other domestic agendas often render the actual lived experiences of Egyptian Jews invisible. Even more important, they demonstrate that the popular conception of Egyptian Jewishness has risen not from immutable essential minority identities, but through specific public discourses with identifiable interests and political commitments in the Egyptian domestic sphere.

Taken together, these essays suggest the essential modernity of the concept of minorities in the Arab world. A discourse of minorities emerged in embryonic form with the upheavals of the Ottoman Empire’s territorial disintegration and subsequent collapse from the mid-nineteenth century to the First World War. With the appropriation of most of the former Ottoman Arab provinces into the British and French empires, new colonial governments further encouraged the emergence of minority identities for their own purposes and enforced them through specific legal and political mechanisms backed by the threat, and not infrequently the actual use, of military force. Once in place, these minority narratives often came to stand in for discussion of other issues in a fractured and uncertain postcolonial political landscape.

In the second part, Minorities, Nationalism, and Cultural ‘Authenticity,’ contributors look at the multifarious ways that ethnic, linguistic, and religious communities have sought to define themselves as central to the modern state and the national project in a variety of circumstances. Aline Schlaepfer’s When Anticolonialism Meets Antifascism: Modern Jewish Intellectuals in Baghdad challenges the received wisdom that Baghdadi Jewish intellectuals were dependent on British government protection during the mandate years and consequently disappeared from the scene after Britain’s withdrawal in 1932 and Faysal’s death the following year. Instead, she argues, a core group of influential Jewish writers and thinkers began to head up a public discourse that adhered to a strong anticolonial position while also objecting to an Iraqi-German rapprochement on anti-Nazi and antifascist grounds. Schlaepfer’s uncovering of this late Baghdadi Jewish discourse suggests multiple processes of remaking minority identity: first, an attempt to move away from minority affiliations with colonial states and, second, deliberate efforts to craft a secular, democratic, leftist political landscape in postindependence Iraq in which Baghdadi Jews could participate actively and fully.

In Assyrians and the Iraqi Communist Party: Revolution, Urbanization, and the Quest for Equality, Alda Benjamen examines how Assyrians engaged with communism to forge new political spaces for themselves in Iraq from the 1940s to the 1960s. She argues that Assyrians in Iraq were originally attracted to the party for its pluralistic membership and its emphasis on secularity, offering the possibility of full Assyrian integration into Iraqi national identity. When their labor activism within the context of the Iraqi Communist Party on behalf of oil workers in and around Kirkuk and membership within ICP-affiliated organizations began to be seen as a threat to the new Ba‘thist state following the 1963 coup, the new regime targeted Assyrian ICP members along with thousands of Iraqis for courtmartial trials and imprisonment, at times impugning Assyrians’ nationalist commitments and suggesting that they were not committed Iraqi citizens. This alignment of economic and political commitments, clashing with the fragile Ba‘thist state, caused the Assyrian community to feel isolated and targeted, ironically increasing its sense of communal separation.

Hiroko Miyokawa likewise focuses on the ways in which a minority community sought to insert itself into the modern state and reinvent—perhaps circumvent—its minority status. In The Struggle over Egyptianness: A Case Study of the Nayruz Festival, she investigates the Coptic Christian remaking of a Coptic religious holiday, the Nayruz festival, into a national display affirming Coptic commitment to the Egyptian state. Locating the beginnings of this idea in nineteenth-century Pharaonism, Miyokawa argues that Coptic leaders engaged in nationalist discourse deliberately de-Christianized Coptic public displays like the Nayruz festival with a view toward promoting Pharaoic visions of Egyptian national identity and arguing for the essential cultural authenticity of Copts as Egyptians.

Finally, Samuel Liebhaber looks at the attachment of concepts of cultural and linguistic Arabness to the Mahri language spoken in Yemen. In From Minority to Majority: Inscribing the Mahra and Touareg into the Arab Nation, he examines a body of literature that claims a Himyarite (Yemeni) origin for the Berber languages of North Africa, particularly among the Berber-speaking Touareg. Liebhaber suggests that this narrative is built not on linguistic evidence but on premodern historical intersections between the Touareg and the Mahra, perhaps focused around camel trading—an activity that by the modern period carried positive connotations of Arab and bedouin cultural authenticity. Despite its evident falsity, then, the linguistic theories linking Berber and Mahri allow both minority groups to claim a kind of cultural Arabian authenticity that carries political benefits in both the Yemeni and the North African contexts.

The final part, Minorities in the Transnational Sphere, argues that many Middle Eastern minority identities have been forged in essentially transnational rather than local or regional contexts. Here again the focus is on processes rather than definitions, looking at how minorities have been constituted and entrenched not only through events in the homeland but also through the particular interests of diaspora communities and transnational institutions. In the post–World War II period, some expressions of minority identity have also been influenced by the rise of a disenfranchised and economically disadvantaged immigrant Muslim community in Europe, a designation that has helped shape a general narrative about minority troubles in an undifferentiated global landscape.

The first chapter in this part, David Bond’s Tunisia’s Minority Mosaic: Constructing a National Narrative, examines the emergence of a carefully constructed narrative of Tunisia as a harmonious mosaic of communities reflective and inclusive of a pluralistic Mediterranean history and identity. He traces this idea both through the scholarly literature on Tunisia, which often implicitly suggests a romanticized pluralistic Tunisian colonial history prior to the authoritarian rule of Ben ‘Ali (an idea with parallels in Beinin’s analysis of the uses of historical narratives of Egyptian Jews), and in the Ben ‘Ali regime’s own advocacy for this framework, which presented Tunisia as an open, tolerant, and modern nationstate adhering to European standards and norms. Focusing particularly on the Tunisian state’s determination to create a built