Nasser: The Last Arab: A Biography

by Saïd K. Aburish

Nasser is a definitive and engaging portrait of a man who stood at the center of this continuing clash in the Middle East.

Since the death of Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser in 1970 there has been no ideology to capture the imagination of the Arab world except Islamic fundamentalism. Any sense of completely secular Arab states ended with him and what we see today happening in the Middle East is a direct result of Western opposition to Nasser's strategies and ideals.

Nasser is a fascinating figure fraught with dilemmas. With the CIA continually trying to undermine him, Nasser threw his lot in with the Soviet Union, even though he was fervently anti-Communist. Nasser wanted to build up a military on par with Israel's, but didn't want either the '56 or '67 wars. This was a man who was a dictator, but also a popular leader with an ideology which appealed to most of the Arab people and bound them together. While he was alive, there was a brief chance of actual Arab unity producing common, honest, and incorruptible governments throughout the region.

More than ever, the Arab world is anti-Western and teetering on disaster, and this examination of Nasser's life is tantamount to understanding whether the interests of the West and the Arab world are reconcilable.

Genres: History, Biography, Politics, Middle East, Egypt, Africa, Nonfiction

432 pages, Hardcover

First published April 27, 2004

About the author

Palestinian journalist and writer.

Saïd K. Aburish was born in the biblical village of Bethany near Jerusalem in 1935. One of his grandfathers was a Muslim judge of the Islamic High Court and a lecturer at the Arab college; the other was a village headman.

Aburish attended school in Jerusalem and Beirut, and university in the United States. He returned to Beirut as a reporter for Radio Free Europe and the London Daily Mail. He consulted for two Arab governments and written several books.

Reviews

[Zak · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting bio of an Egyptian leader who had a dream of uniting the Arabian Peninsula and maybe even parts of Africa under a kind of federation. Although he had great oratorical skills and mass support among fellow Arabs, as well as the right ideals, he simply did not know how to go about achieving his vision. This is a true life story of missed opportunities. Time and again he was thwarted by a combination of internal and external forces, including western powers that were apprehensive about a united Arab power structure and its effects on the vital flow of oil. Before this, I didn't know that Egypt and Syria were once joined together as the United Arab Republic, with Iraq nearly entering the fold as well. And then everything started to fall apart. The book itself was a bit repetitive and could have done with some judicious editing but I appreciated the information gleaned from it.

[Mostafa · Rating 5 out of 5]

يؤسس الكاتب لسيرة عبدالناصر، بدءًا من طفولته، ووضعه الإجتماعي بين عائلته، وتناوبه على السفر والعيش بين محافظات القطر المصري وكيف أثر هذا في صناعة جمال عبدالناصر، تظهر لنا تلك السيرة الموضوعية تحولات هامة في شخصية عبدالناصر، وتجيب عن أسئلة تتعلق بالجدل الذي دوماً ما دار وأثير حوله، دموية عبدالناصر وحقيقتها، ديكتاتورية عبدالناصر وتبلورها ومحطاتها، ويلقي الكاتب بالنظر على البيئة السياسية الملكية التي أخرجت عبدالناصر، وتسليط الضوء على الحياة الحزبية والفساد السياسي المصري في الحقبة الملكية، وحادثة 1942 وحرب 1948 وآثارهم في تشكيل الضباط الأحرار، وتبلور أفكار ناصر التحررية في شكلها الأخير، وصناعته منها لحركة حقيقية تهدف لتغيير مصائر البلاد، يحاول الكاتب أن يتناول بموضوعية الأحداث الشائكة، والتي يختلف الناس على عبدالناصر فيها متطرفين إما في التحيز أو المجابهة، فحادثة الصراع الشهير بين عبدالناصر ونجيب، قد أوفاها الكاتب حقها من تحليل الأبعاد والأسباب التي حكمت فكر كل شخص، والتحالفات التي عقدها كل منهما ومبرراته للسيطرة على حكم مصر، ويتبع الكاتب هذا النهج الموضوعي في كل قضايا الكتاب الأخرى، ما يميز أسلوب الكاتب أيضاً أنه لا يتوقف حد السرد، ولكنه يستخلص من خط سير الأحداث رؤية ووجهة نظر معينة يعبر عنها بين السطور ولا تكاد تخفى على القارئ ويصعب عليه استنتاجها، يتجاهل الكاتب في كتابه عبدالناصر داخلياً، ولا أعلم أتعمد هذا أم لأ، فهو يتحدث عن دولة ناصر الإقتصادية والإجتماعية والسياسية على مضض، ويمكن النظر للكتاب بوصفه سيرة لعبدالناصر إقليمياً وليس محلياً، وعلاقاته مع الأحلاف وإسرائيل وأمريكا والسوفييت والاستعمار ومواقفه من القضايا التي حكمت العرب والشرق الأوسط في عهده، ولكنه لا يتطرق للحديث كثيراً عن مصر تحت حكم عبدالناصر، إلا في صراعات عبدالناصر مع الإخوان المسلمين والشيوعيين وعبدالحكيم عامر، وهذا لما لها من تأثير في صياغة وحكم تحولات عبدالناصر الإقليمية وتعاملاته في إدارة الملفات والقضايا العربية، ويحلل الكاتب فكر عبدالناصر القومي وقضايا الجمهورية المتحدة وعلاقة ذلك الفكر بالثورات العربية من حوله وأنظمة الحكم التقدمية والرجعية، الكتاب كتب بلغة أدبية رائعة، وأحياناً تثير الحزن والألم، وهو يعد بمثابة وثيقة وتأريخاً لقضايا العرب في تلك الحقبة، وليس ناصر فقط، وأعتقد أن لهذا علاقة بتسميته عبدالناصر كآخر العرب، فلا أعتقد أن شخصاً امتلك ذلك الحضور في وطنه، وآثر في تلك الجموع، وكانت مواقفه لها تلك التأثيرات القوية والمصيرية، مثل ناصر، فكما يقول أحد الشعراء العراقيين، كان عظيم المجد والأخطاء، وللأسف، كان عبدالناصر عاطفياً تجاه بطانته وحاشيته، وأعتقد أن هذا دق مسماراً في نعشه كثيراً، ولكن، تعيش يا أبا خالد، تعيش

[Fred Kohn · Rating 5 out of 5]

My original intent was to read this biography of Nasser beside The Lion's Gate: On the Front Lines of the Six Day War, by Steven Pressfield. The Lion's Gate is a first hand account of several Israelis' experiences in the six day war (and as I came to find out, other wars as well). But this biography of Nasser fascinated me so much that I changed plans and put down the Lion's gate and read the Nasser book straight through.

People's sympathies are evident judging from the conditions of the two books I checked out from the library. The Lion's Gate, sympathetic to Israel, is well worn. The Nasser biography, sympathetic to Arabs, looks nearly new, despite being published 11 before The Lion's Gate. The Goodreads stats also reflect western readers' sympathies. The Israel book has 2273 ratings and 262 reviews, as opposed to only 162 ratings and 19 reviews for the Nasser book.

This is truly an outstanding biography. Although the author favors the Palestinians in the Israel/Palestine conflict, and is an obvious fan of Nasser (he wept upon hearing of Nasser's death), he managed to stay pretty objective, I think. He characterizes Nasser as a dictator and recounts unsavory details about Nasser's actions, such as his use of chemical weapons in Yemen.

I was wondering whether Aburish's characterization of Israeli retaliatory attacks as disproportionate was an example of author bias. But I found at least one such attack recounted in The Lion's Gate, where a participant in the Black Arrow Raid recounts that in this raid the Israeli's killed 38 Arabs and wounded 52 in retaliation for an Arab raid that killed one Israel.

I didn’t realize how little I knew about the various Middle East wars until I read this book. I didn’t even know about the Suez crisis in 1956! I had to look up what nationalization was. Is nationalization necessarily socialist I wondered?

Another bit I found interesting was the burning of the Mosque of Omar by Christian terrorist Denis Michael Rohan. I had a bit of trouble tracking this down on the internet. According to Google AI, Mosque of Omar is a misnomer for Al Aqsa Mosque. The event was significant at the time, and Wikipedia has a fairly detailed article on Rohan.

I enjoyed every bit of this book, although I didn’t follow the part about Nasser's career up until he became president very well. This book mentioned a few other biographers of Nasser, including Anthony Nutting and Wilton Wynn. I’ve got them on my to read list. Nasser is certainly an intriguing fellow.

[Ahmedasal · Rating 5 out of 5]

كتاب رائع يصف حياة الزعيم عيد الناصر و يعرض لتجربته الثورية في مسيرتها التاريخية و ظروفها المحيط بها

[Tim Pendry · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a 2004 biography of Gamel Abdel Nasser from a well known Arab journalist, this is worth reading for insights into events that have taken place much more recently in Egypt and the wider region.

Aburish expresses ambivalence towards this curious character, a romantic idealist whose personal conduct as a dictator was (unless you were Muslim Brotherhood or Communist) better than most.

Aburish's Arab heart seems to appreciate that Nasser represented an emotive restoration of dignity to a people who had been denied respect over a long period of Turkish, French and British imperial control.

On the other hand, although his last years showed some ability to function effectively within the rules of the game, his story is one, fundamentally, of failure and not just because of imperial opposition.

Aburish writes of him as a man 'whose heart was in the right place but whose policies were too weak to cope with the problems he faced', an autodidact small town dreamer. He is right.

But one should not be too harsh. It is unlikely that any man could have done much better. Sadat and Mubarak clearly failed to resolve any of the problems he faced, merely intensifying thuggish dictatorship.

By the end of the book, we are, if we have a heart, faced with the same ambivalence to him as Aburish. If only, if only, we say ... and then find the 'if onlys' multiply to meaninglessness.

On the one hand, the man was just another Arab dictator in a culture that has still (today) not really got past the stage of relying on pashas, tribal leaders and autocratic dynasts.

On the other, he at least tried to reflect the will of the people and made real efforts to modernise his country (with some success) despite the traditionalist obscurantists - and was only tactically brutal.

Much of the problem here is central to the Arab condition. Autocratic leadership is accompanied by a complete lack of an institutional learning process to create administrative capability.

Such leadership is also used to surrounding itself with a court of friends that are judged on friendship and loyalty and not on competence or shared vision. The result is inherent instability.

Nasser retained power because he had one unusual skill and one new tool - he could speak to the crowd as Churchill could in another era and, like Goebbels and FDR, he had radio to spread his message.

The army too often becomes the only structure where some form of capability meets vision but, here too, Nasser was ill served by his own generosity and lack of interest in the quality of his colleagues.

He was thus a very Arab leader, with all the strengths and weakness of the culture, and it is valuable to have an experienced Arab journalist interpret him for us.

Indeed, there are times when Aburish goes a little native, not so much in his sentiments as in his style, with repetitions for emphasis and the fluctuations of heart and mind that are intrinsic to the culture.

Indeed, the book is fascinating until the end of the Suez gamble, about half way through the story, when the decline in Nasser's mission sets in and seems to be reflected in Aburish's suddenly heavier style.

To his credit. he avoids blaming everyone but the Arabs themselves for the catalogue of errors that we see in the book, also a history of the region from the Free Officers coup to the rise of the PLO.

There is sorrow rather than anger as tribal interests, ideology, egos, the superior cohesion of the Israelis, Western ambitions and corrupt and decadent elites create the unending mayhem we know so well.

But this is not to exonerate the West at all. The behaviour of the CIA is interesting not only for its despicability but for its lack of political accountability at home - still going on in the region today.

CIA involvement in drawing up death lists for the Baathist coup (that was eventually to lead to the 'regime' of Saddam Hussein) against Kassem in 1963 makes a mockery of US moral claims to leadership.

The West was involved in assassination as strategy and instrument of policy. Only fools really believe that there is much moral content to Western decision-making as we hurtle towards war in the Ukraine!

The book is also a sustained critique of Western support for Political Islam which started much earlier than most believe and which has been an own goal of no less standing than has been the Saddam one.

In assessing the successes (rhetorical) and failures (practical) of 'Nasserism' - Arab nationalism - its culturally-sensitive secularism was the baby that got thrown out with the bath water.

The relationship between an essentially conservative Nasserism, the more radical Baathism and Communism with Political Islam is a story of incommensurate ideologies manipulated by outside powers.

Perhaps only Nasser, based on the instinct of a modernising soldier recalling his small town background, saw the danger in Political Islam if it was allowed to take hold if ever Arab nationalism failed.

Ghaddafi attempted another solution, of course, which was to incorporate Islam within a revolutionary national socialist model but the Baathist model of secularism jettisoned culture altogether.

Instead of understanding that Arab Nationalism was a potentially progressive and collaborative force, the West, the British in particular, did everything they could to undermine it.

Progressive for Arabs but also progressive in order to reach some form of equitable relationship with the West - this demand for equity, respect and dignity seems to have been dismissed out of hand.

The Western tool in the war against communism (the primary driver of Western foreign policy) and Arab nationalism alike was Islamism which is not to be confused with Islam (Nasser was a sincere Muslim).

The book is worth reading just to remind ourselves of the foolish decisions made by 'our side' against secularism that ultimately led to bloody civil war in Syria and counter-revolution in Egypt.

As I write this, dimilar decision-makers seem to be teetering on the edge of yet another global war (the Ukraine) so questions have to be asked about their competence to rule over the long run of history.

This is not to exonerate Nasser himself from egregious blunders and often being all mouth and no trousers but the resistance to what he stood for was undemocratic and ignorant.

There were ample opportunities to work with rather than against those who spoke for real popular sentiment and feeling ('dignity' above all) and still draw appropriate red lines - even over Israel.

Underhand subversion by adventurers, failing to appoint and listen to seriously effective diplomats, obsession with communism and working with obscurantists in preference to secularists were crimes.

Nasser was a romantic failure, a creature of his culture, an inspiration perhaps still to many Arabs but ultimately a lesson in there being no substitute for political discipline and capacity.

[Ietrio · Rating 2 out of 5]

Was Nasser the last Arab? Weird. But no, this is a hagiography. Nasser is the last Arab in the sense that nobody is worthy to be called an Arab. A statement that is damn close to what the Islamists say about not being worthy if you are not ready to die for the cause.

What makes things easier for me, is that Aburish has such a simple mind.

> The Hashemites had, and have, "Made in the West" stamped on their rule. Left with only poor Jordan, they continue to depend on out­ side powers to survive.

So somehow the taxpayers from other countries owe the 10% of the Islamic tax to the Arab leaders.

> Although he and his advisers lacked experience, a Saud-sponsored, full-fledged, stupid attempt was made to assassinate Nasser immediately after the UAR came into being in February 1958.

[Irfan · Rating 2 out of 5]

A drag of a read. Repetitive. Aburish cannot hide his adoration of Nasser, even justifying the unjustifiable deeeds of this dictator.

[يحيى عمر · Rating 4 out of 5]

رغم العنوان الذي يوحي بأن الكتاب هو مجرد قصيدة مدح، إلا أنه على غير هذا التصور كتاب فكري رصين وهام

[Elan Garfias · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic biography of the most consequential Arab leader of the twentieth century. Said is warm toward his subject but pulls no punches when assessing his ultimate success. Though Nasser made the dream of Arab unity more tangible than it had been in centuries, even he ultimately wasn't sure how to fully bring it to fruition. Though his ideological vagueness allowed him to reach a massive audience throughout the Arab world, it also left him stumbling forward and unable to stay ahead of events, trying to steer a middle course through the Cold War and making steps toward socialism without creating a full party machine to steer things (the military went on to fill this role). While the Suez Crisis made him a hero throughout the Third World, and his Voice of the Arabs broadcasts attracted massive followings in neighboring countries, he remained on the back foot. The author asserts that Nasserite cells in various Arab armies probably could have seized power and toppled pro-West regimes, yet in many cases he held them back, probably because Egypt itself was difficult enough to run. Indeed, when Syria fell into his lap he had no idea what to do with it, so Iraq and Jordan would have been out of the question. In many ways his trajectory reminds me of Hugo Chavez, starting off as mildly reformist before falling afoul of the imperial powers, moving gradually in a socialist direction but never fully getting there. He emerges as a fascinating figure trying desperately to chart his own course, trying to create a regime that can outlive him while centralizing power in his own hands, yet astonishingly uncorrupt. The last chapter goes into great detail on the background and aftermath of the 1967 Six Day War, especially relevant today with the land grabs in Gaza. His dedication to Palestine was such a critical part of his appeal, and he sleepwalked into a war which destroyed Egypt's ability to do anything about it. This led to his reluctant championing of Arafat's Fatah as vanguard of the Palestinians, with massive implications for the region in the ensuing decades. Though this book is twenty years old, its opening premise still holds true. Saddam and Arafat and have both passed from the scene, and what Arab could possibly take their place? Yet even they remained regional players, for all their references to Arab unity. In the author's words, Nasser places alongside only Mohamed and Saladin as true pan-Arab leaders. Unless or until someone new arises, Nasser remains the last of them.

[Brumaire Bodbyl-Mast · Rating 4 out of 5]

Aburish’s biography (perhaps even hagiography) of Nasser, an oddly scattershot and repetitive piece, does offer as much insight into the subject as it does the author. It is not a truly an academic piece- polemic assertions, grandiose generalizations, and rather unprofessional language and formatting dominate it. Reading it can be tedious in part due to its repetitive nature and confusing argumentation, and odd way of constructing temporality. Some of the pictures featured- such as those of Nasser chumming around with Fidel at the UN, are not discussed at all. Of course, part of this may be the fault of the edition I have, which is the first (and possibly is a promotional copy? I can’t be sure, however- Aburish’s books are already comically rare.) Despite these faults- the book is still a fairly useful text, the general facts shine through, and the author’s usage of interviews, some personally conducted, demonstrate the uniqueness of this piece. The value also lies in betraying Aburish’s perception of Nasser: the God that failed. Comparisons between ‘the Last Arab’ (an appropriate title for ‏الرئيس, due to the general failure of Arab Nationalist projects since 1970) and the Prophet abound. Indeed, perhaps a prophet is an appropriate comparison for Aburish’s tragic Gamal. According to the author, Nasser parallels the lineage of Abraham, as it was not he who failed, it was his people. The author even assigns foresight to the Egyptian, proclaiming that it was Nasser who foresaw the coming danger of political Islam, especially in the Muslim Brotherhood (though I would argue his fault with them was more political and personal rather than ideological- they represented a rival base for populist politics, and were more intense in their form of Islam.) The people are blamed for their inability to cohere anything for Nasser, though some of his incompetent choices for assistants are also brought to the chopping block. Though, perhaps commendably, Aburish does not center Nasser’s political career squarely on the relationship of him to Israel, which so often clouds western perception. In fact, his Nasser is one who believes peace is wholly possible (if actively hampered by Israeli hostility and hawkish governance), which, though I’m not sure is the whole of recent scholarship, there is certainly enough evidence to back up. The book gives a thankfully wider view on the mid-20th century Middle East with an original perspective that makes it quite interesting to read- and familiarizes the reader with various aspects not often discussed in the West. But overall, Aburish’s biography is a worthwhile, if frustrating read for anyone interested in the man- though perhaps later editions are even better.

[Rob M · Rating 5 out of 5]

Nasser: The Last Arab is an emotionally charged, fast paced biography on one of the most important world leaders of the 20th century. Nasser was one of the three tallest pillars of the non-aligned movement (alongside Tito and Nehru) during the Cold War and, perhaps more than anyone, embodied in himself the politics of Arab liberation.

In rich, arresting tones, Said Aburish paints a picture of Nasser as a man divided between an idealist, a pragmatist and a tyrant. The author implicitly positions himself as the conscience of the Arab people, particularly the conscience of the anti-Islamist "Arab from the street and souk", and moves sharply between lavish praise of this towering leader, bordering on adulation, to sharp criticism of Nasser's personal failures and squandered opportunities.

In many ways it feels like Aburish's appraisal of Nasser is also an appraisal of the entire Arab people. He points out the Arab inclination to place all their aspirations onto the persons of their leaders, and in telling the story of the most pronounced example of such a person since Mohamed and Saladin (the authors words) he implicitly critiques an entire people.

This is an enjoyable book and more than just a simple biography, although I advise interested readers to seek out the writing of Nasser's journalist friend and propagandist par excellencé, Mohamed Heikal. Heikal's views are referenced liberally throughout, and his own memoirs give an excellent history of Nasser and his era from the perspective of the centre looking outwards, rather than that of an outsider looking in.

It is a sad thing that we here in the West we don't study the life and deeds of Gamel Abdul Nasser more often, and that he is only a marginal figure if he is considered at all. The staggering importance of the man to the great majority of the world's population, not simply Arabs but all the newly liberated peoples of the 20th century, cannot be overstated. Those wishing to step over the political barricades of European exceptionalism could do much worse than starting here. So too those who wish to understand the political character of the Arab world outside of reactionary Islamism.

[ماجد المرزوقي · Rating 5 out of 5]

أكثر الكتب التي قأتها حيلدا عن قائد الأمة جمال عبد الناصر

[Gamal soliman · Rating 3 out of 5]

الحديث عن حياه الزعيم عبدالناصر لا يسع الا الكثير من المجلدات ولكن هنا اختصر الكاتب حياته بما لا يخل من اصل الموضوع

[Omar · Rating 5 out of 5]

Aburish paints a balanced picture of the most revered figure in modern Arab history. He tries to be as fair as possible but you can sense his love for Nasser throughout the book, something he finally confirms in the final few pages when he writes his reaction to Nassers death.

This book is a fantastic whirlwind tour of Nasser's entire life, that cannot go into too much detail on each specific aspect. You finish the book with a great understanding of the man, his temperament, his inconsistencies, and most importantly his failures. Whilst also gaining a solid understanding of his great adversaries. A good history book should leave you wanting to learn even more on the subject and the supporting cast and this has done just that, encouraging me to pick up a book on King Faisal of Saudi Arabia for instance.

In the final chapter, Aburish writes that when the Arab world faces trouble, we think of Nasser. He wrote that in 2004, and it still rings true today.

[Damilola Ojikutu · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is an undertaking of a biography about Gamal Abdel Nasser and attempts to do a general overview of his governance style, career and diplomacy.

It does seem very even handed, many of the sources seem to reliable but where it often falls short is its description of the military state apparatus. Often times it borderline ignores the role Nasser had in its establishment and often blames the Free Officers for diplomatic faults or corruption. I wish it went more into depth about his character or about Egyptian society outside of the reactions of the opposition.

Overall this is a good account of Nasser’s life and his diplomatic activity when he was in power. Despite the books length, definitely consider it a good a very well done biography.

[H KiLas · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is a detailed biography of a man who had great dreams for the Arab people. The author recounts the different stages of Gamal Abdel Nasser's life and points out at the changes in his personality in each of these stages, the change from Nasser the young conservative to Nasser the ambitious revolutionary to Nasser the traditional and realistic Arab leader. After providing a thorough explanation of the events that had occured during his reign, the author correctly concludes that Nasser's failure to achieve most of his plans was simply because his ambitions were unattainable, more of dreams than ambitions. Despite his acknowledgement of the external and internal contributions to his multiple defeats in different arenas, the author exaggerates in holding him responsible for his different failires in egypt and in the Arab world.

[Isakree · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am not the biggest fan of biographies, but still I read them for whatever reason. I think non-fiction is always worse than fiction, but it's cool to get some knowledge from your reading.
I picked this book up because Gamal Abdel Nasser is my revolutionary for the research essay we're doing in Global History. And I'm just going to go ahead and say that I think this book was kind of boring, but filled with nice information, so now I can go around and brag about me knowing lot's of stuff about Nasser, AND I can go around bragging about how I'm going to have an amazing research paper cause I know so much about Nasser.

[RYD · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book makes clear that Gamal Nasser was a towering leader among Arabs, but that he, like other rulers in the Middle East, was greatly lacking when all was said and done. Author Said Aburish offered some worthy insights, especially about the role American foreign policy played in the rise of radical Islam. But the book was often repetitive and could have used some editing to winnow that down.

[Agrama · Rating 4 out of 5]

Even if you hate Nasser, read this book and it'll make a difference in your character!

[Corey Rowe · Rating 5 out of 5]

excellent.