RFK Jr.’s Anti-Arab Remarks Draw Rebuke as Critics Cite Arab Contributions

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s remarks about Arab achievement drew swift criticism after he asserted at a Grand Rapids event that hundreds of millions of Arabs contribute little to science, literature or major academic honors. The response focused on two issues: the claim’s factual errors and the consequences of portraying a diverse population as lacking intellectual contributions.

Kennedy spoke while appearing in Michigan for Republican candidate Mike Rogers, in a closely watched contest with Abdul El-Sayed. Michigan has the highest share of Arab Americans among US states, according to a population comparison cited by the source. Kennedy described “500 million Arabs in the world” and said they “don’t produce science” or literature, and do not win the Nobel, Fields or Wolf prizes.

The assertion was met with examples spanning centuries. Entrepreneur Saad Mohseni named historical figures including Ibn al-Haytham, associated with optics; Al-Kindi, linked to cryptanalysis; and Al-Zahrawi, known for contributions to surgery. His list also included Ibn al-Nafis, who described pulmonary circulation, and Ibn Khaldun, whose work is associated with the study of society and history.

Modern science offers direct counterexamples to Kennedy’s remarks about major awards. Omar Yaghi, born in Jordan to Palestinian refugee parents, received the 2025 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for developing metal-organic frameworks. He had also received the Wolf Prize in 2018 for work in reticular chemistry. Egyptian-American chemist Ahmed Zewail won the 1999 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his work in femtochemistry.

Mohseni’s list of Nobel laureates of Arab heritage also named Peter Medawar, E. J. Corey and Moungi Bawendi, whose awards recognized work in medicine, organic chemistry and quantum dots, respectively. The examples make the dispute concrete: Kennedy’s sweeping claim is contradicted by scientists whose careers and honors are readily identifiable.

The criticism extended beyond science. Journalist Justin Baragona pointed to two recent National Book Award winners: Lebanese writer and painter Rabih Alameddine and Egyptian-American journalist Omar El Akkad. His response, like others, argued that Kennedy’s claim failed even a basic factual check.

Critics focus on the wider message

For some observers, correcting the record was only part of the issue. Senator Chris Murphy argued that Kennedy’s words belonged to a wider effort to deny Muslim Americans equal standing. The Council on American-Islamic Relations called for Kennedy’s removal from his Cabinet post, describing his comments as racist and bigoted. The group said the remarks erased Arab contributions and could encourage hostility toward Arab and Muslim communities.

Journalist Mehdi Hasan criticized prominent liberal commentators for, in his view, giving too little attention to anti-Muslim and anti-Arab rhetoric. He contrasted their focus on an advertisement criticizing US support for Israel with what he described as their silence when prominent Republicans attacked Arabs or Muslims. That argument broadens the story from one speaker’s remarks to the way media attention is distributed during a heated contest.

The dispute was unfolding amid other attacks on El-Sayed’s identity and associations. Rogers and President Donald Trump had accused him of supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, while Trump had called him a “jihadist.” A speaker at a Rogers rally had also questioned whether El-Sayed was American despite his Michigan birth. The article notes that Rogers said in 2012, while serving in Congress, that he was willing to work with the Muslim Brotherhood.

El-Sayed also faced criticism from Democrats. Former state party chair Lon Johnson accused him of extremism and argued that his criticism of Israel threatened Jewish communities, urging Democrats to leave the Senate contest blank. During the primary, the centrist group Third Way criticized El-Sayed for appearing with streamer Hasan Piker. Piker had said the US “deserved” the September 11 attacks, then later clarified his comment and apologized.

Political consequences remain part of the story

Brad Woodhouse, president of the health advocacy group Protect Our Care, said Kennedy’s comments exposed ignorance and relied on fear. Woodhouse also linked the episode to Kennedy’s history of controversial remarks and to disputes over his handling of public health. He criticized Rogers and Representative John James for not condemning Kennedy’s words, arguing that their silence reflected a political calculation.

The source article’s opening commentary likewise places the episode within a broader pattern of inflammatory rhetoric by figures associated with the Trump team. That framing is distinct from the immediate factual rebuttal: the historical and contemporary examples answer Kennedy’s claims, while critics’ broader argument concerns the atmosphere created when sweeping attacks on an ethnic or religious group go unanswered.

For Arab Americans and Muslim Americans, the dispute carries a direct question of belonging, as well as reputational harm. For voters weighing the Michigan contest, it adds another measure of how candidates and their allies speak about the state’s communities. The factual record is clear on the narrow claim: Arab scientists and writers have made recognized contributions across history and continue to receive major honors. The political response will be judged by whether those who appeared alongside Kennedy address his remarks, and by whether public discussion returns to evidence rather than broad ethnic generalizations.