Want to segregate themselves . Arent they all trying to to, you know, form their own clubs or their own cliques . Well, some of thats true. Thats true of asianamericans. Its true of many groups. And if we want to really have a racially diverse, integrated society, we have to fight our own tendencies to do that. But partly, theres a difference. Your grandchildren are going to be my grandchildren. Theres going to be intermarriage. And and we have a shared future here. But if whites are anxious about being a minority you know what that shows . It shows two things. It shows theres some advantages to being white. Theres a hierarchy, theyd have to to give something up. And second, it shows were not yet really color blind because whites could never look around the room and say, whoa, im a minority. But thats not how it works. We may aspire to that, but we dont have that reality. Cspan your brothers, nelson and carson, what do they do . [laughter] guest theyre writers. Tear twins. Themson edits nelson edits an englishlanguage magazine in taiwan. They both moved to taiwan. Nelson married a girl whos from taiwan, and then carson well, because theyre twinses, twins have a, i think, a special bond, he moved over there too. Can so that leaves me, to my shock, the only member of my immediate family residing in the United States. Thats im amazed that my brothers did this, because my brothers were born in detroit, you know . They lived their entire lives here. For them to make this transition, its not one that i envy. I would not headache a transition. Make that transition. Cspan you went to university of Michigan Law School . Guest thats right. Cspan any other schooling before you got to harvard where you teach . I practiced law in San Francisco for a few years, just long enough so i know what im talking about in the classroom. Cspan and next year where are you going to be teaching . Guest im going to go back to the law school that i went to, looking forward to that. Itll be very different. Cspan chairman of the d. C. Human Rights Commission . Guest thats right. Thats Something Else that i to because i believe this these causes, and i want to make sure that im involved. Im not just writing and talking. Cspan want to run for office . [laughter] guest if youd vote for me, ill think about it. Cspan is that something thats this the back of your head . Guest well, people ask me that every now and then. Im flattered. Im tremendously flattered. I dont think thats where my strengths are. Im here to talk about these issues and try to cultivate leaders. What im trying to suggest is every one of us has to see this as not a burden, but as our responsibility. We cant just wait for someone to emerge to say i will be the leader, i will be the spokesperson. I always turn down that role. I say, no, its not me. Its all of us. Its every one of us. Its a shared common cause. Cspan this is the cover of the book, its called yellow, and our guest has been frank wu. Thank you very much. Guest thank you. The redesigned book notes web site features over 800 notable authors interviewed about their books. You can view the rams and use the searchable day a base and find links to the authors blogs, web sites and twitter feeds. Book notes dog with a brand new look. Org with brand new look and feel. A great way to watch and enjoy the authors and their books. Youre watching booktv on cspan2. Heres our prime time lineup for tonight that all happens next on cspans booktv. Booktv continues with hugh wilford. Mr. Wilford recounts the cias early forays in the middle east in the 1940s and 50s. The operations were led by Theodore Roosevelts grandson, held of the regions covert actions, who was assisted by his cousin, Archie Roosevelt, chief of the beirut station. The author reports that these mens actions would inevitably lay the groundwork for current Foreign Policy relations between the u. S. And middle eastment this is about an hour. [applause] thank you so much for that kind introduction, and like to add my thanks to everybody here tonight for coming out in these conditions. If you hadnt already guessed from my accent, im originally from england, and ill be heading back shortly, so this happens, perhaps, preparation after Southern California for a british winter. Just like to begin by saying a few words about how first, how i came to this subject before describing some of the themes of the book. Now, as youve already heard, my previous book, the mighty wurlitzer, was about cia front groups in the early years of the cold war. These are, apparently, private, nongovernment organizations made up of anticommunist, private citizens engaged in cold war prop began da overseas. Propaganda overseas. It later emerged these groups were, in fact, being secretly funded and to some extent managed by the cia. Now, one group i didnt really engage with in the mighty wurlitzer was the american friends of the middle east. Mainly because its purpose didnt seem to be so much to do with the cold war as with promoting the arab world to an american audience. And also it was antizionist, battling the influence of the emerging israel lobby in 1950s america. And this just seemed so sort offed. And i think odd. And i think i didnt really know quite what to do with it. I mentioned it, but put the american friends of middle east to one side, as it were. After the mighty wonderful litser, i came back to this story and ban beganning into it further. And soon realized the main cia officer involved in the creation of the american friends of the middle east was none other than kermit Kim Roosevelt. Now, this name might already be familiar to you before this evening because he is known as the cia officer who led the 1953 coup operation in iran that toppled the nationalist government of the Prime Minister and restored the rule of the shah. And also, as weve just heard, Kim Roosevelt was sort of an american aristocrat. He was brand son of Theodore Roosevelt. Grandson, and head of the, an early head of the cias middle east division. Thus, his field command of the 1953 coup which, of course, is a sort of, has sort of been cited as a classic case of blowback. It high averted a cold war crisis at the time, but it led to years of u. S. iranian hostility. So i guess right away, even before i started out, i had really two questions. First of which was what was the cia doing funding this proof arab, antizionist group, not perhaps what one would expect the cia to be doing. And why was Kim Roosevelt the enemy or man known as the enemy of nationalism in iran . Why was he backing this group which, among other things, advocated for Arab Nationalists like the egyptian gamal. Well, i did a lot of research in government records. Not so much the cias own records because they are, they remain classified or have been destroyed. But if you sort of snoop around many other record groups, especially those of the state department and also go to British Public records as well, you kind of learn a surprising amount of information about cia operations in this period, also collections of private papers and interviews with surviving Intelligence Officers of the day and family members of my main characters. What emerged from this research was an account of cia in the 1940s and 1950s, and this is at moment really birth of cia comes into existence in 1947. And this is also really the beginning of official u. S. Involvement in the middle east. Theres been very little official presence there prior to this period. So what emerged was this history of the cia in the middle east during these crucial decades, but with at its core Kermit Roosevelt, its partly a biography of Kermit Roosevelt, but its a group biography. It also includes Archie Roosevelt, kermits cousin, another grandson of t. R. And this somewhat colorful, rambunctious personality from a very different background, from the aristocratic roosevelt cousins, Miles Copeland. Hes from the south, from alabama. Compared with the roosevelts, i guess sort of the wrong side of the tracks. And he later becomes this very sort of indices crete discreet, gaer louse [inaudible] hes left the agency on intelligence affairs. Hes also probably the father of stuart copeland, the drummer for the police, in case you didnt know that. Now, together these three men, archie and Kermit Roosevelt and Miles Copeland helped shape the cias Early Program in the middle east. And as Kim Roosevelts involvement in the iran coup of 1953 perhaps suggests, this involved creating quite a lot of disorder in the middle east, various attempts at various coup operations and attempts at coups that left a legacy of of antiamericanism, still troubles u. S. Relations with the region today. But at the same time, these men were arabists; that is, they knew a great deal about the arab world, and they were surprisingly sympathetic towards it. Sincerely believed that they had its best interests at heart. So what this book attempts to do is capture this surprising moment when the cia was most definitely proarab and ask where did this impulse come from, this arabist impulse come from, and where did it go . Why did it eventually become eclipsed by other impulses in u. S. Foreign policy . Well, just to sort of sketch the answers to these questions which emerge from my research, first, as to where this arabism originated, well, to some extent it came from the british who were, of course, the dominant western power in the middle east righter the u. S. industry into the entry into the region in the early years of the cold war. The roosevelt cousins in particular were captivated by the example of earlier british arabists, in particular t. E. Lawrence, lawrence of arabia. They both read up, they both grew up reading his account of his involvement in world war i, the seven pillars of wisdom. Kim roosevelts father actually knew lawrence personally and corresponded with him. So they imbibe sort of tradition of the romantic british attraction towards the arabs. This was also where the concept of the great game came in. In addition to lawrence, they read rudyard kipling, the british bard of the British Empire and the author of this adventure story about a young angloindian spy in india at the time of the rajj which really shaped Kermit Roosevelts childhood in particular, his imagination and his childhood. Its where his nickname of kim, which stuck with him through his adult life, came from. And i think its from this sort of this british influence that the roosevelt cousins in particular get this notion of the middle east generally, the orient as sort of place of potential adventure, for heroic espionage games. But this isnt the only influence on them. I hi its also important i think its also important to realize that there was another tradition on which they drew, a distinctively american one. And it was a sort of nonofficial one. Its the legacy left by a generation of american missionaries in the middle east, missionaries that first started going to the arab world in the early 1800s, hadnt succeeded in converting many of the nonchristians there to christianity, but nonetheless, they had left this important legacy in the region, founded schools and hospitals and, in particular, universities. The American University of way route is the most Important Institution in the arab world prior to the 1940s and 1950s. And it was a creation of these missionaries who identified with arab nationalism. There was this clear relationship between institutions like the American University of beirut, aub, and the creation of nationalist ideology in the arab world. So in addition to this British Imperial tradition, the cia arabists are also drawing on this history of missionary, hearn missionary engagement american missionary engamement with the middle east which is transmitted to the young cia through a number of people of missionary stock who ran the u. S. espionage effort in the middle east during world war ii. Characters like William Eddie and his biographer, thomas litman, is here tonight. So i think this really is the explanation of the puzzle that i started this research with, which is what was the cia doing funding an organization like the american friends of the middle east. And it also explains this sort of arabist element within the young cia, helps explain why it was that Kermit Roosevelt also organized a covert backing for gamal nasser in egypt. So at the same time, thats kermit at the same time Kermit Roosevelt is overthrowing the nationalist Prime Minister of iran, he is aiding the cause of the Arab Nationalist leader of egypt, a government that was created in the wake of the 1952 egyptian revolution against the british monarchy of king farooq. And Kermit Roosevelt dispatches a cia team led by Miles Copeland to cairo. Copelands cover at this point is that of a Booz Allen Hamilton employee, and that name might be familiar to you because it was also the company employing Edward Snowden at the time of his revelations about, this sa surveillance. Nsa surveillance. And the Miles Copeland and the Booz Allen Hamiltons involvement in cairo suggests theres this kind of element of advertising and Public Relations. Americans sort of Public Relations know how is conveyed to the nasser regime through not just copeland, but he has a friend, james eick l burger eichelberger, whose actual background is with the american advertising company, j. W. Thompson. So i call this chapter in my book mad men on the nile. [laughter] theres this sort of mad men performing these secret operations in cairo element to my story at this point. So i wont go into any more detail about the forms that cia arabism took. You can read about those in the book. But i do want to say a few words about the decline of cia arabism, whys it is that the arabists, proarab, antizionist agenda ultimately failed. Because, clearly, fail it did. Nasser became estranged from the United States and really became quite antiamerican. After 1956 the u. S. Throws its weight not so much behind Arab Nationalists, as behind conservative, sort of British Colonial era leaders in the middle east. Meanwhile, at home the american friends of the middle east, that cia front group that is advocating on behalf of nasser and the cause of arab nationalism generally and attacking american zionists suggesting that the u. S. Shouldnt be so much behind israel. Afme and nasser and the u. S. Identification with arab nationalism increasingly gives way to support for conservative regimes and proisrael Foreign Policy. The cia arabists themselves as a group split up by 1958. Kermit roosevelt has quit the agency, so, too, has Miles Copeland. Theyve both gone to the oil industry for somewhat more profitable employment. And Archie Roosevelt, meanwhile, he stays with the cia, but he is moved to another region. Now, there were various forces undermining the cia, cias arabist program from the outside. John foster dulles, secretary of state at the time, takes a strong personal dislike to gamal nasser. The british prove very effective at securing american support for their, basically, antinationalist agenda in the u. S. , excuse me, in the middle east so that the u. S. Starts to rally around british client regimes in the region. Conservative arab leaders themselves also contribute to this move within u. S. Foreign policy. But i think that there is also a big internal problem as it were with cia arabism, and that is that they are so attracted to that tradition of lawrence and kipling and the great game that they resort too readily, too easy to covert operations in order to address u. S. Policy challenges in the middle east. I think this is particularly true of Kermit Roosevelt whose nickname, kim, conjured up the great game. And i think its just a return to that initial sort of conundrum that i started out with, why is it that Kermit Roosevelt, the friend of arab nationalism, is working to overthrow a nationalist Prime Minister in iran. I think if you study papers and you read his memoir of this event, you know, its clear that the cold war, u. S. Coveting of iranian oil fields, these were important considerations for Kermit Roosevelt as they were for other americans involved in the planning of this operation. But for him personally i think the, what really caused him to run this operation and see it through to the end was this desire to play spy games, to sort of act in the tradition of lawrence and the hero of the novel that had inspired his nickname. Kermit roosevelts memoir, the 1953 operation countercoup which was published rather unfortunately in 1979, the year, of course, of iranian revolution, Kermit Roosevelts memoir reads almost like an oldfashioned british adventure story. In the tradition of kipling or john bucken in particular. I just read buckens between mantle green mantle before reading Kermit Roosevelts countercoup, and there are all these similarities between the adventure story and the memoir of a real cia operation. So despite trying to overcome the British Imperial legacy in the middle east by supporting Arab Nationalists, Kim Roosevelt ended up by playing an american version of the great game. So what are we to do with this now . What lessons, if any, can be drawn from this, this story of cia arabism . Well, im an academic and a historian, so im a little uncomfortable about reflecting on current affairs. Try to avoid the historical sin of presentism. And in any case, im not sure the lessons are clear. On the one hand, the surprising fact that cia arabism existed at all suggests that theres nothing, you know, theres nothing irascible about conflict between the u. S. And the arab world. This earlier history of happier relations between americans and arabs flies in the face of those who would argue that theres system some sort of inevitable clash of civilizations between americans and arabs. But on the other hand, and this is something that reviewers have pointed out, it is striking how quickly the cia arabists crossed to the other side of the road, as it were. You know, ceased supporting Arab Nationalists and started southerning traditional prowestern, conservative regimes in the region. Cia arabism only improved a very slender reeled, indeed. Reed, indeed. One thing, though, to conclude does seem fair to me, and that is that this really is a foundational moment in modern u. S. middle east relations. If you look at all the major news stories in the region today from egypt to syria to iran, their origins can be traced to this foundational moment when the u. S. Established an official presence in the middle east and when the cia was created and ran these operations. So in other words, i think if you really want to understand whats going on now, we do have to know about this earlier history. Thanks very much for your attention. [applause] so i have two quick questions. One, in the 40s, the state department was also full of arabists. George what are shall, i think, threatened to resign if true han recognized israel, or at least he was very unhappy about it. So were these people connected with the state Department People . So, you know its a widespread phenomenon in u. S. Governing circles at this point and a number of people believe that the u. S. Should be throwing its weight behind arab world rather than behind israel and they should oppose the partition of palestine and u. S. Recognition of israel. Of course its a battle that may lose because the power of the zionist and American Public life is growing and achieving support of congressman and so on. And of course there is good growing american Popular Support as well for the zionist precisely because of the devastating impact of the holocaust. So, its a phenomenon that embraces both the state department and the cia. With regard to suez, they are not personally involved in the arabists except theyll claimed later to have received some information from british friends of theirs, the british spies and mi6 that something was afoot. Of course it should perhaps presented the arabist with a wonderful moment of opportunity, the fact that the u. S. Effectively intervenes on behalf of of the british and the french and the israelis but by this point already, John Foster Dulles has really become fed up with nasa and i think the real story in some ways i think is starting to see suez in a way an aberration. The main story of growing u. S. Irritation and a distancing from arab nationalism and sort of reproachful action with written in the region so behindthescenes the british and americans, despite suez are starting to grow closer together and to a certain extent it happens at the espionage level. Its the cia and mi6 which started the thawing of British American relations. The u. S. Kind of taking over britains imperial burden as the british certainly saw it in the middle east in the years after suez. Thank you for those questions. You may have already answer this but among all the personnel and your book are you saying there is not one that thought there might be a problem of basic values and contradictions between islam and the west . The reason i say that is because i studied from 17521950. There are a number of figures that did see such a fundamental clash. John quincy adams, alexis de tocqueville, john wesley jesser sen so there wasnt a single figure like that in the personnel of the arabist . Amongst the arabists, there is this belief in a need for christian and muslim civilizations to move closer together in the religions in the ways of life and sharing things in common. For some of the older arabists like William Eddie eddie who is perhaps sort of the founding father of u. S. Espionage in the middle east almost cast this mystical belief in the links between islam and christianity and he sees himself almost as a kind of a bridge figure between the two civilizations. I think his happiest moment comes when he acts as the interpreter between Franklin Roosevelt and king saud at the end of world war ii. Its in the book yeah so he is the interpreter because he knows arabic. Im not sure that the roosevelt cousins have quite this kind of intense belief in the convergence of christianity and islam that somebody like eddie did but its still there i think. The american friends in the middle east is geared towards trying to generate dialogue and theological conversations as well. Something called the continuing committee on Muslim Christian cooperation which the cia is funding via the american friends of the middle east. And this is all sort of prior to ultimately of course islam becomes in the eyes of some u. S. Covert operatives a weapon of political warfare, funding islam must fundamentalists against the soviet union and leads to a history of the blowback which many of us are familiar with today. But for arabists like eddie i think there is this intense belief that the need for genuine mutually reinforcing dialog between christians and muslims. Excuse me . You personally are familiar with those voices of John Quincy Adams . No, just saying amongst the arabist the group that im describing didnt subscribe to that view. Hi there. A couple of questions. I guess first off how united would you say the arabists were and when you look at how many different movements you had emerging simultaneously there was obviously plenty of conflict internally just like today maybe not quite as intensely but fairly intensely. How united were they and do you see some examples where there were breaks within the group . Then i guess just with the two roosevelt grandsons, may be asking speculatively a little bit but what would you say, would Teddy Roosevelt himself have been on their site or do you think you mightve been more on i guess you would call it the conservative sort of more standard American Interest side of the equation if there is even a way to speculate. Just asking. Sure. This regards the possibility of divisions amongst the arabists. They are fairly concerted in terms of their values and the vision that they have for the arab world. Of the two roosevelt cousins i think he is more inclined to covert action and i think roosevelt was a little bit more cautious and even conservative in his approach. Nonetheless, even he actually in 1956 and 1957 was involved in in 1953. And there was a little bit of personal rivalry between them as well. I think he is the main guy in the u. S. , the cias middle east division and that was a role that they carried and i think Miles Copelands rambunctiousness got along pretty well but these are personality clashes rather than anything more substantial. Theodore roosevelts likely views. Certainly he believe that the u. S. Should be britains successor in the region and i suspect he would have, i think you would have proved of Kermit Roosevelts hunger for manley at venture. I think there is a sense in which the 1953 coup is Kermit Roosevelts attempt to sort of have his own sordid story like his grandfathers charge up capitol hill or whatever. But the ghost of Theodore Roosevelt is always hovering over the generation as a benign presence but its also one thats slightly judging and something they dont quite measure up to. Its something going on within the roosevelt family as well. Thank you. Hi. I look forward to reading your book. I want to know, are you familiar with kings counsel by Jack Oconnell . Published by norton in 2011. He was station chief and released in the 60s and into the 70s and he gives quite an account of the cias role in the middle east during that period. Are you familiar with the book and are you familiar with that portion of the history of the agency in the middle east during the 60s and 70s that you would like to comment on . It seems to me i was actually expecting when i wrote the book to take it a little bit further into the 1960s and i will probably finish with 1967. 1967 was a significant year for the sub three in the sense that its the year in which the arabists arouses in the middle east and its feared that the cia is funding in these groups. It is revealed as a cia front which is embarrassing to the zionist enemies. I think the arabists cause is kind of, it really kind of falls apart by 1967 but i think that process has in a sense already taken place before then. In 1958 it emerged as the true terminus does my narrative as it were because that is the year that my three main characters move away from the agency or the middle east within the arab world. But i do know an answer to your original question i do know that book and its a fascinating book yes, and Jack Oconnell, he is present in jordan and that is what the book is about. Its about his function as a cia liaison and an adviser to hussein of jordan. It begins at the very end of my story. The u. S. And the cia, the changing sides from Arab Nationalists to monarchies and governments more traditionally identifying British Imperial interests in the region. So yeah im glad you mentioned it and thanks for your question. Edges might mention that David Ignatius devoted in the post and editorial to Jack Oconnell said to fill in the gap after your book, this is another great book. Okay, thank you. Hello. Just curious and i have to say i havent read your book yet but i read the synopsis and listen to your speech here. Im just thinking that it has to be more geopolitics than anything else and the use of the term arabists sounds more like this romanticizing of these young men that wanted to go off in adventures in the middle east. That sounds like complete fiction to me but if you could explain more or maybe you could give some more evidence of this arabism . I think its much more likely that the cia was being the cia and this was something that was going on like a chess game in geopolitics doing it by getting their funding. Right, i understand what youre getting at. Clearly in the course of a 25 minute presentation by go through the covert in the mention of it and the oil question and the u. S. s desire to ensure that the west still has access to incredibly important resources. But when i started researching this subject, there was this overwhelming evidence of this sort of proarab tendency amongst this first generation of cia emphasis in the middle east. Its something that roosevelt was advocating for before he joined the agency in 1949. He was creating these arabists citizen groups to advocate for the arab side and against the partition of palestine even before hes in the agency. He wrote a book in 1948 sort of advancing the arabists case to the American Public like i guess many, like previous generations of roosevelt. He gave it public life in addition to his career in the secret service and the cia. So, it was very difficult to not take account of this evidence when i was writing the book. I was just curious as to a little more meat behind it, why was it . Did you grow up forever reading about Roger Kipling . I know it sounds kind of crazy. Its people like Kermit Roosevelt that got their initial ideas of the middle east from. There wasnt this tradition of u. S. Engagement with the middle east prior to this period as with their wars with the british and the french. And people like Kermit Roosevelt passed it through the hands of these missionaries who were very proarab and working for the office of Strategic Services and didnt have time to cover the aspect of the story as well. The cia offers a Strategic Services during world war ii and its middle east division was dominated by the these people that had these dominant proarab outlook on the region and the u. S. s role there. That was another influence of these people. Those other factors of course are immensely important and ultimately they win the day. The arabists blues the argument as it were but nonetheless it was there at the beginning. It was undeniably there. So, thank you. Im curious to what extent the arabists were free agents as opposed to carrying out the policies of the president and the secretary of state and the head of the cia and i guess relatedly did you find arabists simply the arabists simply those who are antizionist or were they promoting an agenda which would make the bulk of the arabs that are . I mean did they support the algerian revolts or did they support the french . No, Archie Roosevelt along with many other americans in the middle east and north africa in particular were quite french and identified with the arab independence movements in the french dominated regions of north africa. Archie roosevelt was actually sent home because of his tendency to criticize the french. I mean its really very striking i was reading his memoirs and his diary of his involvement and how profoundly he identified with the cause of arab nationalism in north africa and befriended arab independence leaders during that period. You also asked about how independent these guys were. I think they initially have a lot of latitude within the cia probably because there isnt that much area or expertise about this region and they claim to know something about it. Alan dulles is from a similar aristocratic background, the cia director from 19503 and he is very much inclined to give Kermit Roosevelt his head as it were in this field. Then they gradually sat upon as it were as he becomes increasingly fed up with nasa and suspicious of arab nationalism in the context of the cold war. He very much departure from the arabists and i think Kermit Roosevelt, his decision to leave the cia and early 1958 is probably because dulles is no longer listening to him. He was wildly successful in his career and his success in iran in 1953 and became sort of a cia legend as it were. Things started to sour for him and he is no longer given the latitude that he originally had. I think the answer to your question is originally he had some surprising amount of freedom to act on their own but later on that declined and that led to their departure. Hi. I had a question. You keep referring to them as arabists and in the 50s did these guys have a sense that they are not arabs and they are not sunnis and they would be offended if they were called that . Did these guys have a level of sophistication or did they lump lumped them all as middle east arabs . Its interesting, Kermit Roosevelt and Miles Copeland did did the three of them they knew a great deal about the arab world and try to sympathize with arabs but it didnt seem to extend to iranians. Archie roosevelt before Ken Roosevelts operation, he was in iran and the years after world war ii at the time of the first cold war struggle which takes place in iran in 1946 and 1947 and its clear from his account at that moment that he doesnt really have the same personal sympathy for irans daddy does for arabs. He in fact sees them sort of rather oriental british racist terms. He specifically writes about this in his memoirs and i think there is already this elements of and that seems to be there as well for Ken Roosevelt in 1953. He is very ready to sort of except the british analysis of whats going on with these rather kind of weak minded hysterical people who will succumb to soviet influence unless we get in there. Im not entirely sure why that is. I think its partly to do with the fact that possibly iran is more clearly a battlefield in the early cold war just as it had been in the british soviet great game so perhaps they are more inclined to see it as a place for great game adventures but you are right there is that distinction and it placed the advantage of the arabs but not those in iran. Thank you. Hi. I am curious to try to determine is there any link between the arabism or the arabists in the state department and the dash that seems to be part of the attitude today the state department has towards the arab nations . The situation in syria is so chaotic as to be affable as far as im concerned. Can one bring any essence or is there any way of linking the arabists from their time to the present time or maybe its too much of a stretch. I dont think it is at all. As i suggested towards the end of the talk i think there are these extraordinary continuities and similarities between recent events and what was going on in the 40s and 50s. The coup in iran in 1953 is still of course talked about in iran today and its still an issue in u. S. Iranian relations. You could argue that in fact the arabists success in stabilizing the nasser regime in egypt leads to the durability ,com,com ma although this is of course making a big leap but it could partly explain the durability of military government in egypt that has just returned to power and the similarities between events in syria in the 1950s and more recently. They are really very striking striking. Last summer i was reading stories in the newspapers about why isnt the cia in their running covert operations to overthrow the assad regime . The same things were going on in 1956 in 1957 although it was discussed publicly. There were attempts to mobilize Syrian Opposition groups who overthrow the government in syria and the cia simply lacks the assets within syria to be able to do that. In essence you mean the manpower and the spy power perhaps or whatever is needed . Exactly and the links to opposition groups. This is something that Kermit Roosevelt very much made a point of saying repeatedly which was that you cant bring about regime change and less there is a substantial element of people within the country that are willing to go through with it. It cant just be something brought about by external manipulation and i guess that still holds true today. Thank you very much. Speedier welcome. You are welcome. I have a question the agency of the arabists you mentioned as well as 67. In terms of agency to say well it is kind of surprising when you look at it from todays point of view all these proarab and zionist entitys but i recall 25 years ago going to the soviet union and their museum in moscow and they have these geopolitical maps from the 40s, 50s and 60s in the prosoviet countries were the color red and the proamerican were the color blue and its interesting the newlycreated israel was colored red. The socialist ideas and what have you and arab states were colored lou. That doesnt change around her until the late 50s when everything switches around and started looking at israel as sort of an attachment of the United States. So, looking at it from that element, the soviets had a similar in terms of knowing who they wanted to support during those crucial years which you discuss so im wondering isnt it our question of geopolitics and direct its rather than the agency of some arabists . They happen to be sort of believers in the great christian civilization and the second question is you said 67 is a turning point. Isnt it more 91 and that is the key question when the soviet union collapses and when it does the whole prism of looking at the region through this geopolitical lens falls apart and in the process its a more dangerous place because the soviet union isnt around anymore to keep its satellite states in check so there is no interlocutor who can put the lid on them and repent the crises so what degree 91 is more important and epistemological or you for people in the region than 67 . Briefly you are right about how it flips the region in terms of cohort geopolitical calculations. The israelis originally are seen by many on the american side as more likely to fall into soviet camp than the u. S. Stalin doesnt really have much interest in the arab countries to begin with. So, but in coming to power he sees the middle east as the cold war into the third world and the arabists will lose the argument and within the cia chief of counterintelligence, he also runs the israeli socalled account which is this growing espionage connection between the cia and mossad as this arab world lost in the americans and that increasingly becomes very and port and alliance for the u. S. Not just within the middle east but elsewhere as well, in africa for example. Yeah, and your point about 91 and the cold war is well taken as well. I dont mean to argue for the significance of geopolitical considerations as compared to this arabists impulse