Edward Said, the famous Palestinian American scholar and activist, was one of the twentieth century's most iconic public intellectuals, whose pioneering and – to some – controversial work on Orientalism shaped Middle Eastern and postcolonial studies and beyond. But how exactly did he arrive at his famous maxim to 'speak truth to power'? This dual biographical study examines the lives of Edward Said and the eminent Lebanese philosopher and diplomat Charles Malik, a distant relative 30 years his senior whom Said knew from childhood as “Uncle Charles.” To Said, Malik was no ordinary relative; in his memoir, he called Malik “the great negative intellectual lesson of my life”, and was to describe him as “an ideal as I was growing up” only to later claim Malik “went through an ugly transformation that I could never come to terms with”. M.D. Walhout charts the development of these two remarkable figures, reconstructing in the process the way in which American power in the Middle East came to have a defining effect on Arab intellectuals in the twentieth century. Exploring issues of religion and nationalism, Walhout shows how Said came to reject much of what Malik stood for: Christian faith, hardline anti-Communism and the benign nature of American power. He argues that the example of Malik was instrumental in the development of Said's later belief that the true vocation of the intellectual was not to compromise with power, but to resist it.

Edward Said, the famous Palestinian American scholar and activist, was one of the twentieth century's most iconic public intellectuals, whose pioneering and – to some – controversial work on Orientalism shaped Middle Eastern and postcolonial studies and beyond. But how exactly did he arrive at his famous maxim to 'speak truth to power'? This dual biographical study examines the lives of Edward Said and the eminent Lebanese philosopher and diplomat Charles Malik, a distant relative 30 years his senior whom Said knew from childhood as “Uncle Charles.” To Said, Malik was no ordinary relative; in his memoir, he called Malik “the great negative intellectual lesson of my life”, and was to describe him as “an ideal as I was growing up” only to later claim Malik “went through an ugly transformation that I could never come to terms with”. M.D. Walhout charts the development of these two remarkable figures, reconstructing in the process the way in which American power in the Middle East came to have a defining effect on Arab intellectuals in the twentieth century. Exploring issues of religion and nationalism, Walhout shows how Said came to reject much of what Malik stood for: Christian faith, hardline anti-Communism and the benign nature of American power. He argues that the example of Malik was instrumental in the development of Said's later belief that the true vocation of the intellectual was not to compromise with power, but to resist it.

What is the nature of intellectual activity in the Middle East, and what is its role in politics and society? While much scholarly attention has been given to the intelligentsia in the West, a comprehensive analysis of the social role of intellectuals in the Middle East has until now been lacking. This new book seeks to fill this gap, providing an overview of the role of influential thinkers in public life in the Middle East, and the impact they have had upon social, political and cultural spheres in the region. Covering a diverse range of key thinkers on the Middle East from Edward Said, Mohamed Arkoun and Halim Barakat to Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi and Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulusi, the book examines intellectuals' connections to social movements, 'street politics' and civil society, and democracy and its prospects in the region. This is an important new contribution to the literature on Middle Eastern societies and politics.

Explores the many facets of Arab political thought from the nineteenth century to the present day.

For sixty years, U.S. government officials have conducted public diplomacy programs to try to reach Arab public opinion—to inform, educate, and understand Arab attitudes. American public affairs officers have met serious challenges in the past, but Arab public criticism of the United States has reached unprecedented levels since September 11, 2001. Polls show that much of the negative opinion of the United States, especially in the Middle East, can be traced to dissatisfaction with U.S. foreign policy. Rugh, a retired career Foreign Service officer who twice served as ambassador to countries in the region, explains how U.S. government officials have dealt with key problem issues over the years, and he recommends ways that public diplomacy can better support and enhance U.S. national interests in the Middle East. This struggle for the hearts and minds of the Arab world, so crucial to the success of American efforts in post-occupation Iraq, is carried out through broadcasting, cultural contacts, and educational and professional exchanges. Rugh describes the difference between public diplomacy and propaganda. He points out that public diplomacy uses open means of communication and is truthful. Its four main components are explaining U.S. foreign policy to foreign publics; presenting them with a fair and balanced picture of American society, culture, and institutions; promoting mutual understanding; and advising U.S. policy makers on foreign attitudes. Public diplomacy supports the traditional diplomatic functions of official business between governments. Whereas diplomats from the United States deal with diplomats of foreign governments, public affairs officers deal with opinion leaders such as media editors, reporters, academics, student leaders, and prominent intellectuals and cultural personalities. Rugh provides an up-close-and-personal look at how public affairs officers do their jobs, how they used innovation in their efforts to meet the challenges of the past, and how they continue to do so in the post-September 11 era.