Making the Arab World: Nasser, Qutb, and the Clash That Shaped the Middle East

by Fawaz A. Gerges

How the conflict between political Islamists and secular nationalists has shaped the history of the modern Middle East Just two years after the popular overthrow of Hosni Mubarak in 2011, the Egyptian military ousted the country's first democratically elected president--Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood--and subsequently led a brutal repression of the Islamist group. These bloody events echoed an older political rift in Egypt and the Middle East: the splitting of nationalists and Islamists during the rule of Egyptian president and Arab nationalist leader Gamal Abdel Nasser. In Making the Arab World, Fawaz Gerges, one of the world's leading authorities on the Middle East, tells how the clash between pan-Arab nationalism and pan-Islamism has shaped the history of the region from the 1920s to the present. Gerges tells this story through an unprecedented dual biography of Nasser and another of the twentieth-century Arab world's most influential figures--Sayyid Qutb, a leading member of the Muslim Brotherhood and the father of many branches of radical political Islam. Their deeply intertwined lives embody and dramatize the divide between Arabism and Islamism. Yet, as Gerges shows, beyond the ideological and existential rhetoric, this is a struggle over the state, its role, and its power. Based on a decade of research, including in-depth interviews with many leading figures in the story, Making the Arab World is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand the roots of the turmoil engulfing the Middle East, from civil wars to the rise of Al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Genres: History, Middle East, Politics, Nonfiction, Egypt, Islam, Religion

496 pages, Hardcover

First published April 10, 2018

Reviews

[Steve Donoghue · Rating 5 out of 5]

A brilliant book looking at the fissure at the heart of the modern Arab world, the split between nationalism and Islamic fundamentalism - told through the intertwined biographies of President Nasser and Sayyid Qutb. A very, very strong recommendation! Here's my full review:

https://www.thenational.ae/arts-cultu...

[Joseph Stieb · Rating 3 out of 5]

In some ways fascinating, and in others oddly tedious, this is a book with a great core idea that could have used A. A more rigorous edit. and B. A rethinking and broadening of its purpose.

When you see this title what, do you think the book would be about? My guess was that it was a sort of dual biography through which the lives of Nasser and Qutb would be used as vehicles to explore Egypt's and the Middle East's seemingly interminable struggle between Islamists and nationalists. The book sort of does that, but its real focus is the relationship of Nasser's Free Officers Movement and the Brotherhood. This is not a bad topic for a book, but the title really makes it seem like a different book.

I also thought this book would be more appealing to a wider audience, given that Nasser, Qutb, and the clash between these forces is really interesting and relevant. The text, however, is really only for academics, and maybe even specialists in MIddle Eastern history. It is loaded down with unnecessary academic jargon (subjectivities, an endless stream of -ation words), it is quite long, and a huge portion of it (like the last 2 hours of the audiobook) is devoted not to how this clash made modern Arab politics but to an extended critique of the Muslim Brotherhood's insular and authoritarian leadership. Furthermore, the biographical sections of this book are just not as compelling as they could be. You get a sense of what these titanic figures thought and did politically, but not who they were as people. There's also really not that much about even their brief period of rule in Egypt, which I was most interested in hearing about. This book just didn't put enough thought into who its audience would be and what a wider audience might want to hear. That makes it surprisingly narrow in appeal.

That's a lot of criticizing. I do want to emphasize the value of Gerges' main argument that the origins of this clash are really more political (in the sense that they are about a power struggle) than ideological. Of course, these groups obviously have ideological differences, but originally they cooperated to bring about the defeat of imperialism and the fall of the monarchy. Nasser then turned on and tried to control the Brotherhood, causing a split between accommodationists in the movement and radical resisters who eventually came to have Qutb as their figurehead. This is an important reminder that Arab/Muslim politics are, well, politics; they are not all wild-eyed fanatics driven inexorably and inflexibly by dogma to kill each other. Gerges subtly undermines that stereotype; if only the book was written for a wider audience, it could have a much bigger effect on the way people see Arab politics.

The other really interesting point from this book was a rethinking of the Arab world's shift from Arab nationalism to Islamism as the dominant ideological/political form. Gerges says that the whole idea that the 1967 defeat killed Arab nationalism is overblown. This defeat of course crushed the movement's credibility in many ways, and was emotionally devastating, but the real causes of this shift were the continual repression, corruption, and inequality of the Nasserist and then Sadat-ist systems. Even more important was Sadat's co-opting of religion to build his legitimacy; Sadat encouraged the flourishing and organizing of "moderate" Islamic groups as the only permitted civil society groups. Sadat allied with the Brotherhood to crush other forms of political resistance, so it makes a lot of sense that his quid pro quo with them (which blew up in his face in the form of his own assassination) fueled the ascendence of political Islam.

I definitely learned a lot about Egyptian history in this book, and a good deal more about Nasser (a much more paranoid and ruthless dictator than I realized) and Sadat (a figure seemingly driven as much by insecurity at his own failures as blind fanaticism, although he was a true fanatic at the end of his life). This book just leaves me with a weird feeling. I was into some parts of it, and I basically tuned out other massive stretches. I think the general reader, like an undergrad history major or informed general dude, just wouldn't have the patience for the length, depth, and language of this book, so I can only recommend it to people who study the Middle East at the graduate level or above.

[Asim Qureshi · Rating 3 out of 5]

Promised a great deal, and didn't really deliver for me. Still, some incredible interview material that makes it worth reading.

[Chris · Rating 1 out of 5]

DNF. Tedious. Tortuous. The preface alone is over 30 pages. Disappointed as I have seen the author on television and his attempt to tell the story of Qutb while simultaneously telling Nasser’s story sounded quite intriguing.

[Whisper19 · Rating 3 out of 5]

Too many repetitions of the same thing across chapters (which I could understand since the author can assume that some readers would only read the chapter they are interested in), but also within a single chapter (which I don't understand). Also, there is a strange choice as to when to use Arabic terms and it's English translation and when to use just the Arabic term (this not being 1st mention and subsequent mentions within a chapter).
Plus there is a few elements that are left murky, the arrival of Sadat to power for example.
All in all, honestly, I expected more.

[Osama · Rating 3 out of 5]

قرأت ثلاثة أرباع الكتاب ولم أتمكن من إكماله رغم محاولات عديدة. عنوان الكتاب يتحدث عن بناء الوطن العربي لكنه واقعا يركز على تاريخ مصر ولا سيما الصراعات بين السلطة والتيارات الدينية. الكتاب مفيد وتعلمت منه الكثير لكن به كثير من التطويل لا داعي له.

[Saif Elhendawi · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting and well researched dual biography that frames the modern history of the region as a grand ideological struggle between two towering figures: Gamal Abdel Nasser, the champion of secular Arab nationalism, and Sayyid Qutb, the chief ideologue of modern radical Islamism. Gerges’s book is more than a simple retelling of two lives; it is an incisive argument that the personal and political collision between these two men created the enduring fault line between nationalism and Islamism that continues to define the political landscape of the Middle East to this day. While the book is an exceptional work of intellectual history, its tight focus on its two protagonists, its Cairo-centric worldview, and its very pursuit of scholarly objectivity reveal the limitations of certain historical approaches.

Gerges's central thesis is that the fierce rivalry between Nasser and Qutb was not merely a power struggle within mid-20th century Egypt, but a foundational conflict between two competing, mutually exclusive visions for the future of the post-colonial Arab world. This was a battle for the very soul of a civilization emerging from centuries of foreign domination. On one side stood Nasser, the charismatic officer who led the 1952 revolution that toppled the Egyptian monarchy. His vision was one of pan-Arab unity, modernity, social justice, and staunch anti-imperialism. Nasserism, as it came to be known, was a secular project. It sought to build a modern nation-state on the foundations of shared language, culture, and a collective historical struggle against the West, not on religious identity. For a time, his message resonated powerfully across the Arab world, from Baghdad to Algiers, offering a potent promise of dignity and progress. On the other side stood Qutb, an intellectual and literary critic who became the leading light of the Muslim Brotherhood. Initially a cautious supporter of the revolution's anti-corruption and anti-colonial aims, Qutb grew profoundly disillusioned with Nasser's secularism, authoritarianism, and what he saw as a soulless imitation of the West. His vision, forged in the crucible of Nasser's prisons, was radically different. He argued that the modern world, including Nasser's Egypt, was steeped in a state of jahiliyyah—a pre-Islamic ignorance and paganism. The only solution was a complete societal revolution to restore the absolute sovereignty of Allah by implementing a pure and unadulterated form of Islamic law (Shari'a).

Gerges excels in tracing the tragic trajectory of their relationship, from a brief moment of potential collaboration to bitter enmity. He meticulously documents how Nasser's brutal crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood following an alleged assassination attempt in 1954 was the critical turning point. The torture and suffering Qutb witnessed and endured in prison radicalized his thought, transforming him from a reformer into a revolutionary. His seminal work, Milestones (Ma'alim fi al-Tariq), written in prison and published shortly before his execution in 1966, became the foundational text for generations of jihadist movements, including Al-Qaeda. Gerges argues convincingly that Nasser's victory was pyrrhic. While he successfully crushed the Muslim Brotherhood organizationally and executed its chief thinker, he could not extinguish the powerful appeal of Qutb's ideas. In the long run, the crushing defeat of Arab nationalism in the 1967 Six-Day War discredited Nasser's secular project, creating an ideological vacuum that Qutb's radical Islamist vision was perfectly positioned to fill. The clash, therefore, did not end with Qutb's death; it had only just begun. He continues up to the Jan 25 revolution, briefly commenting on its events and the contemporary politics of Egypt.

For all its brilliance, the book is built upon certain narrative choices that limit its perspective. It is a quintessential example of the "great man" theory of history, a story whose geography is largely confined to Cairo, and whose tone of scholarly detachment mutes its political force. The book’s most significant limitation is its Egypt-centric scope. The title’s promise to explain the "Making of the Arab World" is undermined by a narrative that rarely leaves the banks of the Nile. This methodological choice inadvertently echoes the classic Orientalist pitfalls famously dissected by Edward Said. In his work Orientalism, Said argued that a key feature of Orientalist discourse was the construction of a monolithic, essentialized "Orient" or "Arab World," which erased the vast diversity and dynamism of its constituent societies. While Gerges is a far more nuanced scholar than the Orientalists of old, his decision to let the Egyptian experience stand in for the Arab experience risks reproducing this homogenizing tendency. The result is that the vibrant and competing political and artistic movements of the broader region are dismissed or ignored. The rival secular nationalism of the Ba'ath Party in Syria and Iraq, the unique revolutionary character of Algeria's war of independence, and the burgeoning influence of Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi ideology are all reduced to footnotes in a Cairene drama, flattening a complex, polycentric reality into a single, digestible narrative.

Furthermore, Gerges's admirable effort to remain "objective" and provide a balanced portrayal of both flawed protagonists weakens the book's political impact. As the historian E. H. Carr argued in What is History?, the notion of pure objectivity is a fallacy. Historians are not neutral; they inevitably select and interpret facts based on their own perspective, and this selection process is itself an act of judgment. Gerges's bias is one towards scholarly detachment. By presenting the conflict as a symmetrical tragedy between two powerful but flawed visions, he avoids passing a stronger moral judgment on the brutal legacy of Nasser's autocracy or the violent fanaticism that Qutb's ideas would later inspire. This measured, "above the fray" approach strips the history of its urgent political lessons. It presents a fascinating artifact for study rather than a potent, politically charged argument about the past's direct consequences for the present.

Finally, the reliance on a "great man" narrative, as compelling as it is, risks downplaying the wider social, economic, and cultural currents that made these men so influential. This is where a counter-example like Howard Zinn's landmark work: People's History of the US which offers a critical alternative lens (and which I simply can't stop referring to and recommending). Zinn deliberately decenters presidents and generals to tell history "from the bottom up." A "people's history" of this era would focus not just on Nasser's charisma but on the peasants' hunger for land reform that gave his policies mass appeal. It would analyze the Muslim Brotherhood not just through Qutb's theology but through the grassroots network of social services that anchored it in poor communities. In short, it would show how ordinary people, through their material conditions and collective actions, were not just spectators but active participants in the making of their world.

Fawaz Gerges's Making the Arab World is an important book. It is a work of outstanding scholarship that masterfully articulates the origins and enduring significance of the conflict between secular nationalism and political Islam. Its biographical focus provides a powerful and lucid narrative that makes a complex history accessible. However, its narrative choices—its "great men" framework, its Egypt-centric scope, and its posture of objectivity act as limitations that left me wanting more. It brilliantly illuminates the leaders but leaves the followers in the shadows; it details the drama in Cairo while the rest of the region waits in the wings. Ultimately, this work is a vital piece of the historical puzzle, but it is not the whole puzzle. I still appreciate the effort and sadly one can't afford to be too critical of books like this one, as this topic largely gets ignored or sidelined in general. One either finds even more Orientalist works that completely homogenize its subject or takes away the people's agency, or bland academic texts that eschew narrative completely and lack any radical thesis. So I still suggest checking this work out for this reason.

[Sherif Gerges · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonderfully written, comprehensively researched and piercing with its insights into the incipience of the two most consequential ideologies in the Middle East - Nasserism and Islamism. Gerges has done a masterful job of dissecting and illuminating on the foundational roles, complex life trajectories, and unique personal characteristics of two central figures, Gamal Abdel Nasser and Sayed Qutb.

This book addresses a critical gap in historical scholarship, as it explores the lives and legacies of two of the most influential figures in Middle Eastern history. Both Nasser and Qutb catalyzed competing movements—nationalism and Islamism—and are revered, almost to the point of sanctification, by some of their followers. Gerges does a fantastic job, adeptly balancing the grand narratives associated with these titanic figures with a meticulous recounting of discrete events on the ground.

I really enjoyed reading about the conspiratorial and pan-Islamic nature of Qutb and the Muslim brotherhood, as well as the schisms within the party that leaves unanswered whether the party organized the assassination of Nasser.

It is worth mentioning the disconcerting omission of any real reference to the Coptic influence on the political transformations and metamorphoses of Egypt's proletariat. This absence is unlikely to be an oversight by Gerges; rather, it reflects the exclusionary treatment of Egypt’s indigenous Coptic Christian population within these historical narratives.

If you are earnestly seeking to understand the intricacies of the modern Arab world, particularly the foundational psyche of the Islamist movement, this book is incredible. It captures the essence of the Arab mindset with remarkable skill and nuance. Indeed, one might argue that forming a well-rounded opinion on the Middle East without reading this book is like driving without a steering wheel; you're doomed to crash.

[Bob Duke · Rating 5 out of 5]

For someone outside the Arab world who has trouble distinguishing from al-Banna and Qutb this book was deeply informative about the conflict between the nationalist forces and the Islamist forces. How their failures and their contest for power has led to countries relying on and improving upon the colonial apparatus of repression had imprisoned the Arabs this contest. The author does end with a note of optimism that the Muslim brotherhood can reinvent itself to provide a genuine modernizing force in Egypt and in the rest of the Arab world. I do not have enough knowledge to give a verdict as to whether this optimism is justified or not.

[Joseph · Rating 3 out of 5]

Qutb and Nasser have more in common than many might think. Not enough
discussion of Nazi-Nasser ties but, still a well-researched book. Glad to see
Youssef Seddik being remembered as a rare pro-Democratic figure in the period.

[Shady · Rating 3 out of 5]

Title is deceiving its about egypt not the arab world and not about the making its about regimen relations with MB over the years more details about qotp
Alot of opinion and interpretation rather than hestoric facts

[Jon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Nuanced, complex, well-written, and highly informative.

[Baher Soliman · Rating 3 out of 5]

ينطلق فواز جرجس في رحلة فكرية عميقة عبر كتابه" صناعة العالم العربي: ناصر وقطب والصراع الذي شكّل الشرق الأوسط" ليكشف النقاب عن صراعين لم يكونا مجرد مواجهة بين رجلين، بل صدى لصراع هوية امتدّ ليهز الشرق الأوسط بأسره وفق تعبير جرجس، وهو الصراع بين ناصر وسيد قطب. يبدأ جرجس بسرد تفاصيل "العصر الليبرالي" في مصر، تلك المرحلة التي بدت وكأنها وعد بالحداثة والتقدم، لكنها كانت تخبئ تحت قشرتها الزاهية بذور التوتر الاجتماعي والسياسي. كانت مصر تتأرجح بين طموح نخبتها نحو الديمقراطية، وهيمنة الاستعمار البريطاني، وصعود الحركات الوطنية التي تطالب بالتحرر. هنا تبدأ ملامح شخصية ناصر في التكون، شابًا عسكريًا غاضبًا يرى في السلطة طريقًا للخلاص من إرث الاستعمار.

ثم ينتقل بنا جرجس إلى الكواليس السرية لحركات المقاومة، حيث بدأت جماعة الإخوان المسلمين تزدهر كقوة موازية للسلطة، رافعة شعار "الإسلام هو الحل". يتتبع المؤلف مسارات النشاط السياسي السري، حيث تلتقي الطرق لأول مرة بين ناصر وجماعة الإخوان، في تحالف هش سرعان ما ينفجر تحت وطأة تناقض المصالح. يؤكد جرس أن التحالف قام على الضرورة أكثر من القناعة. يتعاون الطرفان للإطاحة بالنظام الملكي، لكن سرعان ما تظهر الشروخ في هذا التحالف، مع إدراك كل طرف أن الآخر يطمح للسيطرة على مستقبل مصر.

يأتي جرجس إلى نقطة الصراع الدموي بعد محاولة اغتيال ناصر في 1954، ويطرح تساؤلات نقدية حول الرواية الرسمية التي نسبت الحادث إلى جماعة الإخوان المسلمين. لكن على كل حال تم قمع جماعي ضد الإخوان. وفي السجون، وتحت وطأة التعذيب، يُعاد تشكيل فكر سيد قطب، من مفكر إصلاحي إلى منظّر للجهاد الثوري. كان السجن مختبرًا لصناعة أيديولوجية جديدة أكثر راديكالية كما يقول جرحس.

يتوقف جرجس عند الطفولة والشباب، يرسم ملامح ناصر وقطب قبل أن يصبحا رمزين. ناصر، الحالم بتوحيد العرب في ظل دولة قوية، وقطب، الأديب الذي تحول من ناقد أدبي إلى ناقد حضاري يرى في الغرب خطرًا وجوديًا. كلاهما تأثر بعصره، وكلاهما حاول إعادة تشكيله على صورته. يصور جرجس ناصر ليس كزعيم مغرور، بل كسياسي يدرك هشاشة سلطته وسط عواصف الإقليم، و يُظهر كيف تحولت أفكار قطب من نظرية إلى خطة عملية عبر تنظيم سري هدفه قلب نظام الحكم. يختتم الكتاب برحلة ما بعد ناصر، حيث يحاول السادات ثم مبارك التعامل مع إرث الصراع بين الدولة والإسلاميين. يروي جرجس كيف حاول السادات استخدام الدين كورقة سياسية، مما أطلق العنان لصعود جديد للإسلاموية السياسية، وصولاً إلى انتفاضات الربيع العربي.

الفرضية الأساسية التي يسعى فواز جرجس إلى تأكيدها هي أن الصراع بين القومية العربية، ممثلة بجمال عبد الناصر، والإسلاموية السياسية، ممثلة بسيد قطب، لم يكن مجرد صراع أيديولوجي بين فكرتين متناقضتين (القومية العلمانية مقابل الإسلام السياسي)، بل كان في جوهره صراعًا على السلطة والنفوذ وتحديد هوية الدولة في مرحلة ما بعد الاستعمار. يوضح جرجس أن ما دفع هذا الصراع ليصبح دمويًا هو التنافس على السلطة وليس الاختلاف الفكري فقط. التحالف القصير بين الضباط الأحرار والإخوان بعد ثورة 1952 انهار ليس بسبب اختلاف الرؤى الفكرية فقط، بل لأن كل طرف أراد احتكار السيطرة على الدولة وتحديد مسارها.

وفق ذلك، فهم تاريخ الشرق الأوسط الحديث لا يمكن أن يكون مكتملًا دون تحليل هذا الصراع باعتباره حربًا على الدولة والهوية والسلطة أكثر منه مجرد مواجهة بين أفكار متعارضة. ومع ذلك تبقى فرضية جرحس غير ثابتة الأركان، فجرجس يقوم بتبسيط الصراع إلى بُعد سلطوي محض، رغم أنه واقعيًا كانت السلطة في قلب الدين في فكر قطب، فكيف ننزع هذا عن ذاك! فبين ناصر وقطب، لم يكن الخلاف فقط حول من يحكم، بل حول كيف يحكم، وما هو مصدر الشرعية: هل هو الأمة ككيان قومي أم الشريعة الإسلامية؟ لو كان الأمر مجرد صراع سلطوي، لكان من الممكن الوصول إلى حلول وسط بين الطرفين، لكن الخلاف الأيديولوجي كان جذريًا لدرجة أنه جعل التعايش بين المشروعين مستحيلًا.

يفترض جرجس أن الدين كان مجرد أداة في الصراع على السلطة، لكن هذا يقلل من مكانته كعامل مستقل يؤثر في تشكيل الهوية السياسية والثقافية. بالنسبة لسيد قطب، لم يكن الدين مجرد وسيلة للوصول إلى الحكم، بل كان جوهر المشروع نفسه، رؤية شاملة للعالم وللعلاقات الإنسانية والسياسية.

يعتمد المؤلف على مزيج من المصادر الأولية والثانوية، مع التركيز بشكل خاص على المقابلات الشخصية مع شهود عيان ممن عايشوا الأحداث أو كانوا جزءًا منها، فبعض ممن قابلهم جرجس من جماعة الإخوان ( أحمد عبد المجيد- أحمد رائف- محمود عزت ومهدي عاكف...) وغيرهم، وممن قابلهم من ضباط الجيش وأفراد من الدائرة المقربة من ناصر ( هيكل، هدى عبد الناصر، سامي شرف..) وغيرهم. مع طبعًا الوثائق والمراجع و الكتب . ومع ذلك بعض الشهادات تعكس وجهة نظر شخصية قد تتأثر بتجربة السجن أو الانتماء السياسي، وكان لابد من تحليلها تحليلا عميقًا، فمزالق الاعتماد المفرط على شهادات الأفراد يتطلب من الباحث حسًا نقديًا للتفريق بين الحقائق والتفسيرات الشخصية.

ربما الكتاب يكسر فكرة ثنائية "الضحية والجلاد" التي كثيرًا ما هيمنت على الكتابات العربية عن هذا الموضوع، ليقدّم رؤية ترى الصراع بين ناصر وقطب كأكثر من مجرد صدام بين طاغية وضحية، بل كصراع بين مشروعين سلطويين يختلفان في الوسائل لكنهما يتشابهان في السعي للهيمنة، ومع ذلك فالكتاب نفسه لا يقدّم معلومات جديدة حتى مع تخمة المقابلات التي قام بها المؤلف، زاوية قراءة الصراع قد تبدو مختلفة، لكنها سطحية نوعًا ما كما أوضحنا .

[Dennis Murphy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Making the Arab World: Nasser, Qutb, and the Clash That Shaped the Middle East by Fawaz Gerges is an academic exploration of the legacies of the forefather of modern Militant Islamism and the first modern dictator of Egypt. Gerges makes his mission rather plain from the beginning: he aims to challenge conventional wisdom. Qutb as the intellectual founder of groups like AQ and ISIS is a notion Gerges disputes, though perhaps not as well as he might think. Gerges interviewed many of Qutb's followers, including many who have been imprisoned, and he believes that Qutb would be deeply dissatisfied with the current state of Jihadists. Nasser would also be disappointed with his institutional heirs, as the pan Arab Secular Nationalism has been replaced with simple nationalist patriotism, empty of unifying ideals that make it vulnerable to subversion from Islamists. There are some things here worth pondering for a bit, such as Nasser's clash with the Islamic Clerics not being foreordained. Nor, even, was it clear that Nasser would even have been a more secular leader, as he had his own strong and private religious beliefs and could have taken a different path. Qutb, likewise, could have gone another way.

I'm not entirely sure this book will be all that accessible, and it seems to be geared towards a field that has increasingly lost favor among modern spectators of international politics. Even so, it is worth at least a quick glance. The reader should be mindful that Gerges is challenging a particular view, so I would encourage anyone picking up this book to at least try to get a glimpse into what is being disputed.

There is an interestingly curious bit where a couple of people in prison regretted killing Sadat (Nasser's successor) because Sadat was actually very tolerant of political Islam and the militants. Even those somewhat responsible for his killing thought it was a mistake, and believed that given enough time they could have made Sadat's Egypt into a true haven of militant political Islam. After killing him, militant and political islamists were hounded out and repressed. I'm not sure how much I buy this, but it was one of the more memorable bits in the later chapters.

[Danny · Rating 4 out of 5]

Simply put this book is Gerges' explanation of existing schism between the region's secular-nationalists and Islamists that has shaped much of the Middle East's modern politics. Gerges uses Nasser and Said Qutb and their political descendants as his foils for his explanation for the current state of political affairs. There are some small critiques to be made of this book but on the whole it is a solid explanation of how the region got to where it is. Gerges relies on a series of interviews conducted with both members of the Muslim Brotherhood and Nasser's associates to weave together his narrative. I found the research to be quite insightful on the Muslim Brotherhood and the organization's culture. I was disappointed that there wasn't a better history of Egypt's secular-nationalists or much discussion of the schisms that have developed within Egypt's ruling elite (ie the Military and the business elite under Mubarak). Gerges wrote this book with a general audience in mind and I found that it was accessible. For those interested the politics and history of the Middle East, I would recommend this book, just don't make it your sacred text.

[Diane · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book looks at ideological history in the Middle East, framed as a dual biography of Gamal Nasser and Sayyed Qutb. The book looks at the historical context of the early 20th century, then provides a brief biography of each of the men, and then looks at how the movements that they led - Arab nationalism and radical Islamism - came into conflict. The author begins this part with Nasser's coup in the early 1950s and continues to the present day. His overall thesis is that Arab nationalism and Islamism do not necessarily have to clash, but that both movements wanted power, and were unable to come to agreement. The author interviewed many of the people who are still alive from this period, which provided direct insight into the events in ways that most other books do not have. He also analyzed how the two movements have fared since Nasser's death. I thought he could have added more about the Arab Spring and subsequent events, which he alludes to, but never really develops. He does offer some reflections on Egypt's future in the conclusion. Definitely a must-read for anyone interested in Egyptian or Middle Eastern history.

[Kyle Anderson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is definitely more of a political science book than a history book so don't expect much story telling. There is a tendency to repeat the same argument, or the same point over again, which gives the sense that a certain chapter or passage has not offered any new information. However, over the course of the book this is made for in the mass number of interviews conducted with former Free Officers and Muslim Brotherhood members that offer a very personal touch on the often untouchable figures of Nasser and Qutb. The book skips over the 1980's and 1990's quite a bit but it spends a great deal of time on the 1950's and 1970's, the periods of greatest Arab Nationalist and Islamist socio-political sway in Egypt respectively. What makes the book really unique is that it was written recently enough so that it can offer an insight into how the Muslim Brotherhood faced the 2011 Arab Spring and why it lost power. Definitely an important lesson for understanding the lack of a political middle in Egypt.

[The Contented · Rating 3 out of 5]

A hugely insightful book that nonetheless took me many months to read. (This was my ‘kitchen’ book - the non-fiction book I would flip through while preparing meals. During lockdown it was replaced by the more urgent reading of Nigella and Delia - as a matter of survival).

The book’s conclusion: that the Islamist- Nationalist faultline - with both sides locked in a seemingly absolutist existential struggle - remains the most important impediment to the normalisation of political life in Egypt today. The argument is compellingly made.

It’s written academically, rather than as a more accessible text - although I did pick it up when browsing a bookshop - the old Dillon’s (now Waterstones) on my way back from a meeting near SOAS to the tube station.

I didn’t just buy pencils. So proud of me.

[Mark · Rating 4 out of 5]

Traces the political history of Egypt from colonial days, goes into depth on the birth and history of the Muslim Brotherhood, Nassar, Mubarak and Morsi. It delineates the forces that have lead to rival factions in government since independence. Pan Arabism, vs nationalism vs Islamism are explored with looks at the important players over the years. The author concludes that there is no consolidation or unity of forces for the Egyptian people given the entrenched ultraconservative leadership of the Islamists and the hold on to power rather than adapt conservatism of the military and the nationalist factions.

[Nina · Rating 3 out of 5]

this book brilliantly dissects the animosity between arab nationalist and islamic fundamentalist movements in the middle east, while simultaneously discussing the lives of two of its most formative men, qutb and nassser. i especially loved the interviews that the author did with many of the men that were intimately involved with the free officers and the muslim brotherhood. however, at times the analysis became quite tedious, and i think the book would have made benefited from some more editing. perhaps the book is more suited as academic reading rather than leisurely reading, but i believe it could have been a combination of both

[Tabea Werhahn · Rating 4 out of 5]

Learned a lot !!

„Apart from the human and social toll that this six-decade old violent struggle has exacted, it has radicalised and militarised Arab politics, and led to entrenched dictatorships and deeper repression. The Islamist-nationalist Fault line remains the single most important impediment to the nominalisation and institutionalisation of political life in Egypt, the most populous Arab state, and other Arab countries. There can be no political transition as long as the Ikhwan, the most influential social movement in the Arab world, and the military-dominated regime are locked in a state of war.”

[ST · Rating 4 out of 5]

excellent work. Informative. Colorful voices from within different camps. The book’s title is not accurate, that’s right, but it represents the author’s argument: this rift between Ikhwan and Nassir formed the politics of many Arab countries. I would give it 3, because it’s too long and repetitive, he could have done better in this regard (I have to say his editors are bad). The testimonies are extremely interesting and important, many are rare especially from Qutub’s disciples.

[Alexander J · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very interesting book, wonky. All about the history of the interplay between revolutionary Islamist and institutional Arab nationalism. It’s hard to imagine a region where the “two parties” have gone so wrong and have such a horrendous relationship with each other. The kindred between the Arab religious right and the western is obvious, but the experience of oppression has straightforwardly made the brotherhood much weaker than it should be.

[David James · Rating 2 out of 5]

Highly repetitive, something that could have been written in half the pages. Some of the interview material was interesting but the author repeats his main ideas over and over again throughout the book and only focuses on Egypt. I was hoping he would draw more parallels to other parts of the 'Arab World'.

[Laura · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoroughly researched, well documented, clearly written. A fascinating story, and one that sheds light on a lot of current news from the Arab world.

But skip the introduction. It's a marvel of academic obfuscation that nearly kept me from reading the book. Go right to chapter one, where he proves that he actually can write in clear English.

[Ala · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting take on the birth of the famous Arabism, and Islamism wave that covered most of the Middle East. The book gives a clear look at the power struggle that took over Egypt and swept the rest of the Arab/Muslim world.
With such ideals growing more division and struggle, mostly made for political gains while fooling the public of their righteous Godly agendas.

[Mohamed · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is a very good book about the development of different ideologies in Egypt especially in the Arab world in general. It includes lots of interviewing material and could give a good understanding of how the policies in Egypt affected the ideologies, during British occupation, during liberation and under oppression of different Egyptian presidents..

[Ulysse Colonna · Rating 4 out of 5]

Based on numerous interviews, the book shows how two initially tightly connected of Egyptians modernisers, the islamists and the nationalists rapidly grew apart after the latter’s conquest of power. L

The author also shows how inter-generational competition and individual personalities and ambitions almost make supposed ideological difference unimportant.

[Coolguy · Rating 5 out of 5]

A well-written history and framework to understand the post Hassan al-Banna split between the Muslim Brotherhood/Ikhwan and the Arab nationalist/secularist factions in Egyptian politics and in greater conflicts in the Middle East.

[R]

hist 301 to die for
egypt. interesting and i dont mind the framing through two opposing characters it's structurally useful and though maybe reductive in the era, true to how we come to conceptualize the past i think