Since 9/11, the conventional wisdom about the motivation behind such terrorism has gelled. The violence, we are told, was a reaction to misguided US foreign policy, namely US support for Israel and for unpopular, oppressive Middle Eastern regimes. This anger, finally exploded and resulted in 3,000 deaths.

Anti-Americanism is genuinely widespread among Middle Eastern governments and many Muslims, however there is something seriously misleading in this account. Arab and Muslim hatred of the US is not just, or even mainly, a response to actual US foreign policies. Rather, such hatred is largely the product of self-interested manipulation by various groups within many Muslim

countries, groups that use anti-Americanism as a foil to distract public attention from other, far more serious problems within these societies.

For years now, anti-Americanism has served as a means of last resort by which failed political systems and movements in many Muslim societies try to improve their standing. By assigning blame to the US, many Muslim leaders distract their subjects' attention from the internal weaknesses that are their real problems. Thus rather than pushing for greater privatisation, equality of women, democracy, civil society, freedom of speech, due process of law, the public focuses instead o­n hating the US.

Obviously, the US, like every other country in the world, has tried to pursue a foreign policy that accords with its own interests. But the fact remains that these interests have generally coincided with those of the Muslims. For example, the US may have saved Kuwait from Iraq in 1991, mainly to preserve cheap oil. But US policy was still, in effect, pro-Kuwaiti, pro-Muslim, and pro-Arab. After all, the US could have used the war as a pretext to seize the oil for itself or demanded lower prices or political concessions in exchange for fighting Iraq. Instead, the US did none of these things and sought the widest possible support among Arabs and Muslims.

A brief survey of US foreign policy reveals how hard the US has tried to win the support of Muslims:

In 1973, the US rescued Egypt by forcing a ceasefire o­n Israel. The US then becameCairo's patron in the 1980s, providing massive arms supplies and aid while asking for little in return.

The US saved Arafat from Israel in Beirut (1982), when it arranged safe passage for him and pressed Tunisia to give him sanctuary. The US support overlooked PLO terrorism and its alignment to the USSR. Despite Arafat's backing of Iraq (1991), the US became the Palestinians' main sponsor in the peace process pushing for the creation of a Palestinian state.

The US has also spent blood and money saving Muslims in Afghanistan from the USSR, in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia from Iraq, and in Bosnia and Kosovo from the Serbs. It has supported Muslim Turkey against Greece and courted Syria, even tacitly supporting Syria's control over Lebanon.

For decades, the US kept its forces from entering the Persian Gulf for fear of offending the Muslims. They o­nly entered, when invited in to protect Arab oil tankers against Iran. In Somalia, where no vital US interests were at stake, the US engaged in a humanitarian effort to help a Muslim people from anarchy and warlords.

Why has the real record been disregarded by so many Muslims?

Whatever the extent of US ignorance of the Middle East, the inability of many Muslims to understand the US has been greater. Throughout the Muslim world, its leaders have always expected the US to try to conquer them since, this is what they would do if they controlled the world's most powerful country.

It is important to remember how tightly controlled the press is in many Muslim countries. It is hardly surprising that the public, constantly fed antagonistic views, have grown hostile to the US.

America's record is constantly distorted. The US is blamed for the suffering of Muslims, whom it protected in Kosovo and Bosnia. US humanitarian efforts in Somalia is portrayed as imperialistic.

The real nature of the threats which the US have protected Muslims from is downplayed. Saddam Hussein has started two wars, killed hundreds of thousands of Muslims, looted Kuwait, threatened its neighbours, tortured his own people, used chemical weapons against civilians, and tried to develop nuclear weapons. Despite his record, Muslims are constantly told by their leaders that the US is responsible for Iraq's problems and seeking to dominate the Persian Gulf.

The attempt is to reduce all US foreign policy to o­ne issue: support for Israel. Israel's policies are also distorted. The latter element is critical to the validity of the first. If o­ne believes that Israel is an evil force, seeking to dominate the Middle East, kill Muslims and destroy Islam, it would follow that US aid to Israel is the supreme evil. The truth is that the US has merely helped Israel to survive efforts from its Arab neighbours to destroy it.

The US-Israel relationship was quite ambivalent for the first 15 years of Israel's existence, with the US refusing to supply arms or aid. The link intensified o­nly in the face of hostile actions by Arab states, aligned to the USSR and sponsoring anti-American terrorism. And despite such hostility, the US goal has always remained a peace agreement that would ensure good relations with both sides.

The real explanation for anti-Americanism is that it is a useful tool for radical rulers, Islamist movements, and even moderate regimes in many Muslim countries, to gain domestic support:

Egypt and Saudi Arabia have obtained US arms and protection but promoted popular anti-Americanism through the state-controlled media. Iraq has used anti-Americanism as a weapon to re-enter the Arab world, escape sanctions, and rebuild its military might. If the US can be blamed for murdering Iraqis through sanctions, who will remember Iraq's seizure of Kuwait?

Iran uses anti-Americanism to push for the withdrawal of US forces from thePersian Gulf and to deflect attention from its own weakness: the fact that it is Shia, not Sunni, and ethnically Persian not Arab. By claiming US support to Israel is the main cause of anti-Americanism, Palestinian leaders seek to obtain more concessions and gives them an excuse for rejecting any US policies they disagree with.

Anti-Americanism allows intellectuals and journalists to vent their anger against a government approved target (the US) rather than risk criticising injustices or failures at home. Anti-Americanism is also useful for the public as it provides a convenient scapegoat for everything wrong in their lives and why their country never improves.

This is not to deny that there are many legitimate Muslim grievances against the US. But put into accurate perspective, and compared with the legitimate anti-American complaints of people in other regions, the level of hatred is extremely disproportionate. In fact Muslims have suffered far less from US foreign policy than say, Indochina or Central America. Yet virtually none of these peoples have the same level of anti-American hatred that exists in many Muslim countries.

There is o­ne final point to be made. Anti-Americanism is a also a useful way to disparage a set of attractive ideas linked to the US, such as political freedom, pluralism, women's rights, that might otherwise take hold. In this sense, anti-Americanism becomes a weapon against the ideals of liberal democracy itself.