The current state of the Middle East seems like a total mess. From the time of the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, it would seem that everything is going topsy-turvy. However, the region has been in a state of turmoil for decades (maybe even a century) - can one forget the turmoil between the Jews and the Arabs during the 1930's and 1940's, which increased with the end of the Second World War and the push towards getting a Jewish homeland. On the other side, the Ottoman Empire was ending, and leading to a push by the various communities for power through the area. Ibn Saud was battling to conquer the land of Arabia and setup Saudi Arabia. There were powers to be everywhere; and the ever present Shia-Sunni conflict would rear up its ugly head.
However, if you were to look at the current political structure of the Middle East, there is the emphasis on one particular event which seems to be the grand-daddy of all the chaos that is currently there, the precursor to the various nations that have been setup (so, for example, if you look at Syria, it is an amalgamation of many different tribes and communities and the scope for chaos, ruthlessly put down all these years, has risen so fast that the future of the country seems totally at risk with other similar examples) - this was an arrangement between the colonial powers of a century ago, France and Great Britain. This was the Sykes - Picot agreement (named after the good gentlemen who negotiated the agreement from both sides), and the agreement delineated the spheres of control for both countries once the Ottoman Empire was defeated at the end of the First World War (link to Wiki site for the agreement).
This book provides a good reference for the events of that time. There was a huge amount of politics in that area ongoing, and during the course of the First World War, Britain and France had decided that in the event of winning the war, the Ottoman Empire would be distributed among the victorious parties in terms of mandates and regions of influence. At the same time, there was a Turkish upheaval that was against the Ottoman Empire and who wanted their own set of power and authority at the end of the war, there was the demand for a homeland for the Zionists, there were other influential figures whose support was needed by Britain and France, and yet they also felt like a kind of parental authority for the region, that they had the best interests for everybody in the region. If you go through the book and see the flow of history, you would start to see some of the background for the problems that have occurred now, especially the way that the nation states have been setup in that region. Even the 2 colonial powers who had made the agreement, were constantly jealous of the authority of the other, and especially when territory was won in the war, there was a lot of reluctance to honor previous agreements. A great deal of the background between the animosity between the Jews and Arabs in Palestine, and even the fight between the Jewish underground militias and the British authority in Palestine (modern day Israel) could be traced to a slow boil that started in the first and second decade of the 20th century.
However, if you were to look at the current political structure of the Middle East, there is the emphasis on one particular event which seems to be the grand-daddy of all the chaos that is currently there, the precursor to the various nations that have been setup (so, for example, if you look at Syria, it is an amalgamation of many different tribes and communities and the scope for chaos, ruthlessly put down all these years, has risen so fast that the future of the country seems totally at risk with other similar examples) - this was an arrangement between the colonial powers of a century ago, France and Great Britain. This was the Sykes - Picot agreement (named after the good gentlemen who negotiated the agreement from both sides), and the agreement delineated the spheres of control for both countries once the Ottoman Empire was defeated at the end of the First World War (link to Wiki site for the agreement).
This book provides a good reference for the events of that time. There was a huge amount of politics in that area ongoing, and during the course of the First World War, Britain and France had decided that in the event of winning the war, the Ottoman Empire would be distributed among the victorious parties in terms of mandates and regions of influence. At the same time, there was a Turkish upheaval that was against the Ottoman Empire and who wanted their own set of power and authority at the end of the war, there was the demand for a homeland for the Zionists, there were other influential figures whose support was needed by Britain and France, and yet they also felt like a kind of parental authority for the region, that they had the best interests for everybody in the region. If you go through the book and see the flow of history, you would start to see some of the background for the problems that have occurred now, especially the way that the nation states have been setup in that region. Even the 2 colonial powers who had made the agreement, were constantly jealous of the authority of the other, and especially when territory was won in the war, there was a lot of reluctance to honor previous agreements. A great deal of the background between the animosity between the Jews and Arabs in Palestine, and even the fight between the Jewish underground militias and the British authority in Palestine (modern day Israel) could be traced to a slow boil that started in the first and second decade of the 20th century.
No comments:
Post a Comment