Initially published on 23 June 2004 in Politics Forum https://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24876 Republished on 24 September 2006 in Buzzle Excerpts: The absolute reality that the colonial empires could not have existed without the unleashed armies of the Orientalists of all sorts, decipherers of forgotten scriptures, epigraphists, philologists, historians, archeologists, ethnologists, anthropologists, architects, specialists in Linguistics, Numismatics, History of Religion, Comparative Literature, Art History, Political, Social and Economic History, etc. has been kept as a hermetic secret. And more the Orientalist colonial armies of specialists advanced in their work of deciphering and learning the 'other' (thus empowering their countries with the unsurpassed, incommensurate strength of the newly acquired ancient knowledge and spirituality), more the colonial diplomats were pulling strengths in a way that Ottomans, Mughal, Iranians and others be further engulfed into a) barbaric ignorance and lack of identity, b) cultural somnolence, c) hysteric hatred of the Lumieres, and of the Antiquities emanating from the just rediscovered access to ancient civilizations, and d) minimization of the Islamic civilization into a caricature of few religious prescriptions able to guarantee the besotted 'believers' a Paradise in the 'other world'! To put it in a very simple way, Napoleon would have never gone to Egypt (1798) without his many dozens of academia, who achieved a unique scholarly breakthrough by publishing the unprecedented ‘Description de l’ Egypte’.

1. America, the Middle East, and the
Colonial Heritage
If the US conceptualized a plausible end to the colonialism in Iraq, this would
bring about a positive situation for both, the Iraqi people and the American
administration. But this has to do with the refutation of the theoretical pillars
of Historical Colonialism.
Ponderingon America’spossible role in the Middle East
In several editorials I have stressed the point that America does not truly face
in Iraq a Sunni or Shia opposition, insurgence or revolution, but is about to be
crushed on the rocks of French / British Colonialism. Instead of limiting
myself to the superficial level of political and economic colonialism, I rather
focused on subjects related to average educational and cultural systems as
first conceived (or machinated) and ultimately implemented by the colonial
powers, mainly France and England, in lands illegally confiscated from the
Ottoman Empire, Safavid Iran, Mughal India, and Imperial Morocco.
Among other issues, I also insisted on the very negative intentions of the
colonial scheme, pointing out that the ultimate goal of the colonial powers
was the permanent engulfment of the colonized countries into archaic
structures, anachronistic environment, dysfunctional administration, cultural
confusion, nonexistent education, and socio-political dispersion. By now, we
know very well that the unfortunate state-like diagrams from Mauritania to
Indonesia, and from Afghanistan to Mozambique, failed to get rid of this
befallen curse of colonialism.
The long, educational, intellectual, academic, and cultural procedure of
colonialism has not yet been appropriately studied by America, let alone the
rest of the world.
To be precise, the former Ottoman provinces that came under colonial
mandate at the aftermath of WW I, and became 'independent' states after the
WW II do not truly know and/or understand what happened to them. But are
they the only not to know?
Practical aspects of the colonialscheme
Certainly not, these states are not the only not to know; and this should not
surprise anyone! It should rather be expected that the local peoples and
intellectuals, ruling classes and businessmen, would not be able to
understand or even evaluate this critical subject, i.e. the educational,
intellectual, academic, and cultural aspects of colonialism.
The colonial scheme was based on the following practical axes:

2. I. the great old states (Ottoman Empire, Iran, Mughal India, and Morocco)
should not be able to truly and timely understand the scheme, and face it in
the correct time.
(Comment: However, it was already very late for them!)
II. the local peoples that were to be detached (either in Syria, Mali or
Bangladesh) should never advance at the level of education and culture up to
the point of truly evaluating 'what happened to them'.
(Comment: In this dimension the great colonial powers were very successful!
For two centuries, they were receiving in their capitals and universities,
numerous, belittled and besotted Indians, who traveled there to study
Sanskrit, many belittled and besotted Algerians, who moved there to study
Semitic Linguistics, and several belittled and besotted Persians, who enrolled
in these institutions to study Old Persian in cuneiform!)
The number of the accepted students was however limited; it corresponded to
the colonial powers' interests, namely the imposition of local academic 'elites'
on the colonized countries so that these 'elites' permanently diffuse at the
local level the falsehood that they 'studied' and 'learned' in Paris and in
London. However, in real terms, the 'knowledge' and the 'science' that were
administered to them as supposedly 'real', academic truth, were -truly
speaking- the falsified colonial version of History, a partly 'truth' and an
effective distortion, which can be very well identified thanks to the French
expression ‘bon pour l’ Orient!
What was never taught in France and England to these numerous generations
of besotted students and pseudo-academics-to-be, who originated from the
colonized peoples, was precisely what stood at the epicenter of French and
British humanist academics: the interest for the other and the universal
concept of History! These were the nectar and the ambrosia of the Western
European Humanities, but they were reserved –in gravely racist manner- to
the Western students, because the colonial academia always wanted to learn
the truth in order to present it distorted to others, so that the privilege
remains only among the criminal, colonial Anglo-French elite.
The nectar and the ambrosia were therefore reserved for the French and the
British Orientalists exclusively. It consisted in the real power one gets through
learning meticulously the 'other': the universalism or rather the universality of
the Knowledge, the concept of Historicity itself, the concept of Continuity and
Consequence within History, and many other, related topics.
The absolute reality that the colonial empires could not have existed without
the unleashed armies of the Orientalists of all sorts, decipherers of forgotten
scriptures, epigraphists, philologists, historians, archeologists, ethnologists,

3. anthropologists, architects, specialists in Linguistics, Numismatics, History of
Religion, Comparative Literature, Art History, Political, Social and Economic
History, etc. has been kept as a hermetic secret.
And more the Orientalist colonial armies of specialists advanced in their work
of deciphering and learning the 'other' (thus empowering their countries with
the unsurpassed, incommensurate strength of the newly acquired ancient
knowledge and spirituality), more the colonial diplomats were pulling
strengths in a way that Ottomans, Mughal, Iranians and others be further
engulfed into
a) barbaric ignorance and lack of identity,
b) cultural somnolence,
c) hysteric hatred of the Lumieres, and of the Antiquities emanating from the
just rediscovered access to ancient civilizations, and
d) minimization of the Islamic civilization into a caricature of few religious
prescriptions able to guarantee the besotted 'believers' a Paradise in the 'other
world'!
To put it in a very simple way, Napoleon would have never gone to Egypt
(1798) without his many dozens of academia, who achieved a unique
scholarly breakthrough by publishing the unprecedented ‘Description de l’
Egypte’.
Of course, the fierce competition between France and England in
decipherments and discoveries, and the inauguration of so many new fields
of historical knowledge about the World History's highest civilizations could
not leave the other European academics indifferent! Austrians, Prussians and
other Germans, Dutch, Italians, Swiss, Danish and other Scandinavians, Poles,
Czechs, Hungarians and Russians followed the example in an epoch
resplendent with Humanities and Seek for Universal Understanding!
Definitely the French and the English could not monopolize the newly
acquired knowledge, but they also seemed to need the contribution of the
other Europeans (and by the middle of the 19th century, of the Americans as
well) into these new scholarly disciplines.
However, the French and the English were successful in politically
eliminating the rest from the colonized regions, but European scholarly
contributions like those of Lepsius, Golenischeff, Naville and others were
most welcome for the French and the British.
But all this had to be limited among Europeans and North Americans, and
not to be extended among Persians and Turks, who were still running entire
empires (which were however at the brink of collapse). Out of the Oriental
research and the ensuing discoveries and decipherments had also to be left all
the other Asiatic and African nations: Indians, Egyptians, Moroccans, and

4. others – irrespective of their religion.
This policy was perpetuated during the 20th century, after the collapse of the
Ottoman Empire, and has lasted until now. Local educational elites were
allowed to specialize only in the local civilization; they were thus forcefully
disconnected from the world civilizations.
The result is that -even today- no one can learn Gueze (Ancient Abyssinian) in
Morocco, Assyrian – Babylonian Cuneiform in Yemen, Egyptian
Hieroglyphics in Malaysia, or Harosthi Indian writing in Egypt! The
colonized countries had to be and were ultimately disconnected from the
source of absolute intellectual strength and knowledge: the exploration of the
‘other’.
This tragic but attentively concealed reality has indeed guaranteed permanent
national – intellectual isolation, political dispersion and misunderstanding,
and at times enmity and war!
III. other potentially rival powers (Austria – Hungary, Germany, Russia,
Belgium, Holland, Italy, Spain, Japan and the US) should be kept far from the
colonial scheme through various methods.
1. Some of them were truly very small at the European level (Belgium,
Holland) to possibly benefit. They could not endanger the scheme by
controlling Indonesia, Congo and part of Guyana!
2. In other cases, a great European power was subtly pulled in a way to focus
on European affairs; the creation of numerous problems with its neighbors
could therefore minimize that country’s overseas capacities. Austria –
Hungary, having problems with the Ottoman Empire, Russia, Italy, Germany
and last but not least Serbia, could not deploy significant forces overseas.
3. Other European countries of significant size were educationally and
academically unable to catch up fast with Humanities (Russia, Spain); they
were politically diverted from the central areas of the colonial scheme,
according to the interests of France and England. Russia was incited by Paris
and London to detach parts of the Ottoman Empire (all the Caucasus area, the
Northern Black Sea, the Azov Sea) and of Iran (Central Asiatic territories)
only in a balanced and well-moderated manner. The Anglo-French incitement
was geared only to create difficulties to both Islamic empires and to prevent
them from reacting to French and English policies in Egypt, Lebanon (French
infiltration), India, Oman, Yemen, the Hormuz Straits, the Red Sea Straits, and
the Horn of Africa region.
To this case one should also ascribe the French – British attitude towards
Japan. This country was used to keep Russia busy, to contribute in

5. pressurizing China, and to serve similar colonial purposes. This tactics was
successful until the Japanese militarist adventures of the 20s and 30s started
creating problems to France and England; these problems culminated with
WW II and Japan's axis with Germany and Italy.
4. Other great European countries with leading academia in Humanities and
in Orientalism were politically dwarf and disunited until very late (Italy,
Germany); these empires were not established before 1860 and 1870. When
England was rather poised to be left far behind France (successes in the Suez
Canal, French Polynesia and negotiations with Mexico in view of an
enormous empire), the Prussian victory helped in re-equilibrating the rapport
de force between the two leading colonial powers!
Germany's and Italy's Humanities and Orientalism were bearing the stamp of
French authority, approach and target, without any
- genuine criticism,
- deep inquiry about French motives,
- exploration of alternative interpretations of the new discoveries and data,
which would suit better a German or an Italian Orientalism as perfect tool of
imperial (colonial) foreign policy worldwide.
Because no such criticism and sharp analysis took place, Germany lost
Cameroon and Tanganyika, and Italy finally failed to create anything
significant out of Libya, Eritrea and Somalia! Military defeat in 1918 ended the
colonial mini-dreams of Germany whatsoever!
IV. Toward the USA, the two colonial empires, France and England,
developed an intelligent policy, by shrewdly disorienting the US from the
central concept of the colonialism. America was left to detach Spanish
colonies (Panama, Philippines) but US presence in the rest of Asia and Africa
was minimal.
The British needed American presence in Egypt to re-equilibrate the
overwhelming French involvement, and in this regard England used
Americans intelligently. Result of this American "colonial" presence is the
American University in Cairo, the American School of Oriental Research,
American Orientalism and Egyptology, Carter’s excavations of
Tutankhamun's tomb, etc.
But although America was pursuing de-colonization policies in the 30s, the
40s and the 50s, American Orientalists, scholars, academia and intellectuals
failed to grasp the quintessence of the colonial presence in Asia and Africa,
which was not just military occupation and economic exploitation, but a far
larger concept and a far deeper scheme, namely educational, academic,
intellectual and cultural colonialism!

6. American academia was for many long decades a mere replica of British,
French and German universities, to the everlasting glory of the French and
British colonial scheme!
That is why, after the supposed de-colonization of the 40s, 50s, 60s and 70s, all
previous colonies of France and England found themselves in another stage of
colonialism and underdevelopment that lasted until now (post-colonialism);
in fact, colonialism is supposed to perpetuate itself.
Truly speaking, not a single country escaped from the Anglo-French colonial
rule and scheme! The fact that we have now Japanese Egyptology means that
even Japan did not escape from the colonial scheme, but only very late and for
very limited extent! Still today, there are no Japanese specialists on Sumerian,
Hausa, Amharic, Ancient Yemenite, Byzantine Greek, Mithraism,
Manichaeism, Talmud, Islamic Hadith, or Carthage!
Even more importantly, Japanese Egyptology has to prove that it is an anti-
colonial academic discipline and this will happen only through systematic
refutation of the colonial biases and fallacies, of the distortion of Ancient
Egyptian historical sources by the Anglo-French academia, and of the
horrendous misinterpretation of Ancient Egyptian holy texts, myths, epics
and other texts of religious and spiritual contents by the Anglo-French
materialist academia.
The fact that there are by now Orientalist departments in Canadian and
Australian universities, as well as Classical departments in South African
universities means also nothing special in this regard, since these countries
have been deceitfully geared to be 'England outside England'.
And what is the point that South Korean per capita GDP is by now higher
than that of Spain? What do the South Koreans know of the world that could
be compared to the knowledge and the specialization of Humanities in Dutch
or Spanish universities?
With regard to colonialism, it would be essential for the US and the present
administration to deeply understand that all the other countries lost to France
and England in different historical moments. And none of them attempted to
oppose, let alone bring down, the pillars of the colonial ideology!
This was the real essence of the solemnly and prudently celebrated Entente
Cordiale!
And it is essential to realize that only in the 80s and in the 90s scholars in
academically advanced countries, and mainly in America, started reaching
the nucleus of the problem and advancing historical syntheses, theories,
interpretations, conceptual approaches, and philosophical-historical systems

7. that refute and reject the theoretical basis of the Anglo-French Colonialism.
One must not confuse between the political rejection of colonialism, which
dates even back to the 19th c., and the theoretical historical refutation of the
intellectual, educational, academic and cultural colonialism that has not
unleashed but its first masterpieces! The political rejection of colonialism is
limited at a superficial, socio-political level being therefore 'acceptable' and
easy to be manipulated by the French and the British academia. However, the
refutation of the intellectual, educational, academic and cultural colonialism is
exactly the 'revolution' the French and the British academics, diplomats and
political elites are afraid of!
The multi-[olar trickery of Mr. Chirac: the last colonialinvention
of the French
It is essential to grasp right now that the famous, brilliant multi-polar world
of Mr. Jacques Chirac implies above all that these illustrious 'poles', namely
China, Brazil, Mexico, and India (that France tries to manipulate very subtly),
do not bother to imitate the French, the British, the German and the American
universities. France does not want the aforementioned states to extend the
faculties of Humanities of their universities much farther than their borders.
Just some depts. of English, French, German, Russian and Spanish language
are 'good' for the universities of China, Brazil, Mexico, and India; this the
secret wish of the French and the British academic, diplomatic and political
authorities! Quite revelatory is the fact that these depts. do not go up to the
point the French and the British universities do!
These departments and faculties of the aforementioned countries' universities
are limited to mere level of foreign language and literature; they offer nothing
about Celtic archaeology in France, Roman archaeology in England, Scythian
archaeology in Russia and in Germany, ethnology – let alone Orientalism,
Egyptology, Assyriology, Iranology, Turkology, Hittitology, etc.!
Mr. Jacques Chirac's multi-polar world is above all a misled and disoriented
world, so that France continues playing its dirty colonial games.
And one must not be so gullible as to believe that any political refutation of
colonialism has truly brought about the final collapse of the true, deep and
inhuman Colonialism. Quite contrarily, there have been numerous cases of
political rejection of the colonialism that even helped the colonial powers!
Unknownand unevaluatedColonialism
Assuming that America has truly the intention to help spreading democracy
all over the colonized and tyrannized Middle East, we still are not able to
detect any indication in the American policies that would persuade an
objective observer that the Congress, the State Department, and the entire
American establishment has truly a plan about bringing down the prevailing

8. colonial structures. But this is a condition sine qua non for the existence of
democratic establishments.
In this regard, many commentators would suggest that the US does not
intend to bring about the end of the colonial structures in Iraq whatsoever,
and that, on the contrary, Washington only wants to use them to America's
benefit. If this is the case, one must now draw the conclusion that America
already failed. If the simple thought of just 'replacing' France, Germany and
Russia in Iraq was the only thing in the mind of the present administration in
this respect, I would rather advise them to just pack now, and go home!
What would be their mistake in this case? Simply, the fact that they had not
studied the 'logic' of the existing colonial structures; and consequently, that
they did not act accordingly.
Colonial imposition means mostly 'remote control'. The logic of a 'remote
control' in the exploitation of the natural resources, in the imposition of an
appropriate educational and cultural system, and in the assertion of a
harmless (to the main colonial countries' interests) local political power was
probably not well studied in Washington. The result is obvious…
Yet, we could perhaps seek a better possibility for both, the colonized
countries, mainly Iraq and Afghanistan at the time being, and the US. One
could even go up to the point of thinking that a new rising power like
America could mark a success at the point where the fragmented little neo-
colonial states (in this case Iraq and Afghanistan) failed!
In other words, if the US conceptualized a plausible end to the colonialism in
Iraq, this would bring about a positive situation for both, the Iraqi people and
the American administration.
But this has to do with the refutation of the theoretical pillars of academic,
educational and cultural colonialism. By opening the eyes of the colonized
peoples, by making them be mostly interested in the 'other', by introducing a
completely different theoretical assessment of the World History, a different
‘historical model’ as academics say, the US would revitalize these countries
and peoples in a spectacular way.
And this would reduce France's and Britain's size in world politics to the level
of just a 'big Belgium' and a 'big Ireland'. One should therefore focus
extensively on the forged colonial model of History, as well as analyze, reject
and refute it from a much wider viewpoint than that of the excellent
American Orientalist, Prof. Martin Bernal, the author of Black Athena.

9. By Prof. Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis
Published: 9/24/2006