Political Instability And Armed Conflicts

While the aftermath of World War II is often referred to as one of the primary creators of deep rooted turmoil in the Middle East region, the effects of the Cold War and the United States often over-zealous battle against communism is just as much a contributor if not more. The Arab world and the Middle East region were clearly going through quite an extraordinary period throughout World War II and its conclusion, primarily with the creation of most of the states we recognize today and struggling with the continuation of colonialism. These factors set the stage for the emergence of strong nationalist sentiments and Pan-Arab movements across the Middle East. Unfortunately, and much to the detriment of the region, the leaders of these young

During the early history of Islam, the Arabian Peninsula was transformed due to the rise of Islam. Thanks to the increase of Islam across the Arabian Peninsula, Arabs were able to construct an enormous empire after the death of Mohammod due to several reasons. The reasons include having a shared faith, Arab citizens found wealth and social promotion in the military, the Persian and Byzantine empires were weakened, and expansion of the empire became a shared task among the Arab community (Strayer 369-71). One of the ways the Arabs were able to construct their empire so rapidly is because the shared faith in Islam enabled the new organized state to mobilize the military protentional all throughout the Arab population (Strayer 371). Arab citizens/individuals found great wealth and social promotion by being a part of the military and having the same religious beliefs (Strayer 369).

The modern conception of the Middle East was molded in the early 20th century. The French and the British both formulated their foreign policy in the Middle East to help advance their own self interests. Power hungry and desperate for new land, British and French governments struggled to shape the Middle East. Britain’s unwillingness to learn about the people living in the Middle East, coupled with their underestimation of Arab nationalism, made for an inauspicious state. People in these Middle Eastern nations were unable to advocate for themselves and were taken advantage of by corrupt government officials or imperializing western powers. The French and British erred by disregarding pertinent information about the nationalist feelings of the

The actions of World War I had inconceivable consequences for the Ottoman Empire and the Middle East. World War I marked the end of the, already dwindling, Empire and its scope of influence on the world. With this collapse, the Middle East fell into the hands of the British and the Allied forces who arbitrarily divided up the the region to create new nation states. Nations are large aggregates of people who have imagined sovereign rights, commonality, and political community with myths and history that create unity. Instability within the Ottoman Empire helped provide a path for local and international actors to influence the shaping of the region. Among many missteps and political choices there were three distinct players that profoundly

The following wars have been divided between 1.) Wars caused by ethnic issues and 2.) Wars not caused by ethnic issues. After determining the cause of war, I will focus on particular aspects of the war predominantly the death toll, how long the war lasted, if core states got involved in the conflict and if so how far removed were they from the region of conflict. Finally and most importantly, I will compare and contrast the two types of wars (1.) Wars caused by ethnic conflict and 2.) Wars not caused by ethnic conflict) and determine how these wars were ultimately resolved. More specifically, I am determining if wars caused by ethic issues are resolved by internal means or whether they are resolved by external factors such as core states or states that have an invested interest in the matter.

Having set the benchmark of a modern civilization due to economic and industrial superiority, Western European powers had contemptuous feelings toward the Ottomans’ primitive regimes and their internal strife. In fact, the 17th and 18th centuries in the Middle East were periods marked by severe financial crisis, increased decentralization, and stronger external control by western nations. It was clear that members of Ottoman and Persian military and bureaucratic organizations needed to prove themselves worthy in comparison to the European nations in order to shift the global balance of power back towards the East. As a result, drastic political, economic, and social reforms were implemented in the Middle East throughout the 19th century that aimed to both reverse the process of fragmentation within the empires and attempt to regain authority on a both local and global scale. Today, historians often describe this period of transformation as the beginning of the “modern” history of the Middle East as we are still living the consequences of the changes that took place during that period. Throughout this essay, I will demonstrate that on the one hand some of the social reforms that took place in the region helped modernize the educational and cultural affairs of Middle Eastern societies, while on the other hand, the failed establishment of new economic and political policies in the empires helped strengthen European control over the region and subsequently set the stage for the

During the years 1900-2001 a number of significant interventions occurred which affected the growth and nature of Arab nationalism. Several key pressures considerably influenced a change in the nature of nationalism; including, economic levers, agreements and military presenses in the Middle East. Arab nationalism arose out of the fear of the possibility and later the certainty of European or American dominance. The emerging ideology believed all Arabs to be united by both a shared language and history. Foreign intervention in the Middle East long predated the First World War, dating back to during the

Arab nationalism would begin to gain popularity in the 1910s, as the power of the Ottoman Empire steadily decreased and Arab people were increasingly enticed by the idea of an Arab unity. The development of Arab nationalism, especially in the 1910s and 1920s revolved around three critical events and movements. The first major development in Arab nationalism was the emergence of the ideology itself from cities throughout the Middle East, particularly in the Fertile Crescent where the movement gained popularity in reaction to changes that happened in 1908 in Istanbul, the heart of the Ottoman Empire. Second, WWII made it possible for some Arabs, with the support and direction of a new ally, the British to fight against the rule of the Ottomans. Thirdly, with the Ottoman Empire crumbling in the late 1910s, Arab nationalism was able to became the dominant ideology and would subsequently became increasingly popular after the British backtrack on its promise to Sharif Husayn and the Hashemite family to form an Arab kingdom (Khalidi, 1991, p 205). The British, for their part, incited the Sharif of Mecca to launch the Arab Revolt during the First World War. The Ottomans were defeated and the rebel forces, loyal to the Sharif's son Faysal ibn al-Husayn entered Damascus in 1918. By now, Faysal along with many Iraqi intellectuals and military officers had joined al-Fatat which would form the backbone of the newly created Arab state that consisted of much of the Levant and the Hejaz.In addition to Arab revolt by Sharif Husayn in 1916, various revolts had significant influence in the spread of nationalism in the Middle East. A number of Arab revolts against the European powers took place following the establishment of the British and French

World War I ended in 1918, although the vanquishment of the Ottoman Empire on behalf of the Allies—especially that of Europe—has led to a domino effect from which the Middle East still hasn't and probably will never bounce back. The fate of the Middle East inevitably fell into the hands of the Europeans—chiefly that of Great Britain and France. Because of the dismantled state of the economy and government the Middle East became a breeding ground for imperialism with Great Britain and France at the forefront. Nevertheless, one can see that the effects of the Sykes-Picot agreement and the Mandate System resulted in the European imperialistic mindset which laid the foundation of the modern Middle East’s problems.

Middle East tried to preserve the Ottoman Empire but when “Kemal’s forces drove the Greeks from the Anatolian peninsula and persuaded the British to agree to a new treaty (699).” “In 1923,

However, Britain and France did not want to free those lands. They wanted to destroy the Ottoman rule over the Middle East and to divide the region

(Delong-Bas 2004, page 23). Lastly, the states erected by the Western powers on the ruins of the Ottoman empire in the Middle East, such as Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon have gone through a period of weakening due to the Arab spring and other recent events. In the power struggle that has ensued in those countries, Iran and Saudi Arabia are currently involved in a power struggle, in cahoots with their proxies, for regional supremacy. The modern processes of state formation and rise of nationalism ( Halliday, page 26) are the main forces driving animosity between Islamic republic of Iran and sunni Saudi Arabia. National leaders often resort to narratives and myths to rouse nationalist sentiment when they realise the need to rationalize their legitimacy in the state-building process. When the regimes try to position themselves as saviours of particular brand of a religion, an explosive element is added to the narrative which can heighten geo-political tensions ( Halliday 2000, page 29).

Several similarities exist between the conflict incurred by European settlers with Native Americans in the depictions of Inca, Garcilaso de la Vega's La Florida del Inca, and Gaspar Perez de Villagra's Historia de la Nueva Mexico. Excerpts from both works can be found in the compendium edited by Harold Augnebraum and Magartie Fernandez Olmos entitled The Latino Reader: Five Centuries of an American Literary Tradition from Cabeza de Vaca to Oscar Hijuelos. In both narratives, the authors chronicle Spaniards unlawful dispossession of territory that was previously inhabited by Native Americans. Quite naturally, these natives resisted this early form of larceny, which oftentimes resulted in an armed conflict between the two disparate groups. However, it is fairly apparent that both authors viewed this conflict and the appropriation of the Native Americans' land as largely religious matter, which was justified by the sake of Christianity. The narratives are at variance predominantly in their depiction of the natives during this conflict, however. Whereas de Villagra's depiction is decidedly less concerned with these natives and their point of view, Vega frequently takes pains to portray the humanity and dignity of the Native Americans encountered by the Spanish in Florida.

This video is a very relevant and appropriate source for this topic because it discusses the different reasonings for why the Arab Spring failed. Richard Haass explains the side of the people and of the government for why the Arab Spring ultimately did not succeed. He offers a unique approach in the sense that not all countries are the same and had the same failures as others. Because of Haass’s approach to the decline of the Arab Spring, this source is crucial and very relevant to this topic.

The Arab uprising: The unfinished revolution of the new Middle East. Marc Lynch. New York: Public Affairs, 2012. 269 pp.