Contemporary History of Middle East - Assignment Example

 Contemporary History of Middle East Etymology: The region of the Middle East spans southwestern Asia and North Eastern Africa. It is also known as Near East for it has no clear boundaries. American Naval officer and strategist Alfred Thayer Mahan used the term of Middle East for the first time in his published article. ¹ When British and Russian Empires were in great tussle to have their control in the Central Asia, which is known as Great Game in history, Alfred Thayer Mahan realized the strategic importance of this region and of the Persian Gulf as well and called the area the Middle East. Mahan used this term in his article; “The Persian Gulf and International Relations, published in the issue of September, 1902 in National Review. This term invited many criticism for it reflected the Euro centrism to many historians. ². the British labeled Balkan and Ottoman Empire as Near East before the First World War and the region of Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia was referred as Middle East. The United States government first used this term officially in 1957 in the Eisenhower Doctrine and in 1958 the State Department marked the region of Middle East including the areas of Egypt, Syria, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar.³ ¹ Koppes, C.R. (1976). "Captain Mahan, General Gordon and the origin of the term "Middle East"". Middle East Studies 12: 95–98. ² Shohat, Ella. Redrawing American Cartographies of Asia. City University of New York.. ³ Near East' is Mideast, Washington Explains, The New York Times (August 14, 1958).  A-Discuss the difficulties faced by the Middle Eastern empires in adapting to the intellectual, technological, economic, political and social challenges presented by the West in the 18th and 19th centuries. There was a time when Islamic civilization was imposing and its influences extended from the border of China to Spain. It owed its nourishing to Greek antiquity, synthesizing it with Persian and Syrian influences and added valuable contributions in mathematics and music. “Islam was also a paradox. Its social assumptions were feudal and patriarchal” but it tolerated other religions to a high degree. 4. Islam could not demarcate between secular and religious law it was deficient in the sense of divine law or natural law which was the foundation of the Greco-Roman concept of a constitutional state which also provided the determination to the Greco-Western to fight against despotism. In 10th to 13th century by incorporating Hellenism Islam became unorthodox and interesting religion. But it could not bring itself to the anti despotic values as were observed in the West by continuous renaissance and by the incorporating anti-despotic imagery of Hellenism. The history of rise and fall of the Ottoman Empire is a good document of the real tragedy of Islamic Civilization. The Islamized Turks from Central Asia conquered Syria, Anatolia, the Balkans and North Africa. They again challenged the West like their predecessors of Andalusia. Lewis is of the view that the story of the decline of the Empire could only be understood in terms of its fatal incomprehension of modernity.5. They interpreted modernity as gaining modern weapons and ignored the command of Knowledge which is the true spirit of modernity. Even they could not adjust themselves with the modern strategies of war and their progress in naval war fare was also ineffectual. They did not invest in sea going fleets; ignoring the fact the successful modern power was oceanic. The Europeans did not use sea only to exert their mussels but it was also the might of knowledge. Whereas, Islam was the religion of warriors per excellence and it lacked the modern speculative inquisitiveness. “Centuries of renaissance, reformation and enlightenment taught Western to value knowledge above law, religion and tradition. At the same time that the Dutch and Flemish were figuring out how to project maps onto a globe, Islamic judges were still prohibiting journeys to Christian Europe.”6 (Lewis, 2002-pp41). The learning of the language infidels (the European languages) were prohibited by the Muslim law doctors and the diplomacy was relied on the ever curious Greeks. In 19th century the students were sent abroad with the ulterior motive of excelling in war wafers. But Sukru (2008) suggests that the European leaders also opposed the whole sale transformation into an efficient centralized state since they feared Homo Ottomanicus, which would have meant common identity, transcending the ethnic or tribal divide. To maintain the status quo the Europeans simply encouraged administrative reforms. 7 B. Discuss the various reactions of the people of the Middle East to western incursion. Which approaches were successful, which failures and why. Could the people of the Middle East do anything difference to protect them from western encroachment? A glimpse of the social life of Saudi Arabia in the month of Ramadan is sufficed to tell that the Middle East is the victim of identity complex. At 3.30 in the morning young boys in their glittering cars, putting on jeans come closer to chauffeured veiled girls. At spot light the girls throw the paper balls, containing their cell numbers, to the boys. This is one of the practices to show how Arab is trying to negotiate the modern world in a society which is bound by age old traditions. 7 (Viviano, 2003). The people of the Middle East are paranoid of the imperialistic design of the west which to them is the greatest curse to avoid. Consequently, the region could not open it up for western values based on knowledge. The economy is based on the oil resources and if the oil runs out there is no sustainable effort from the governments of the region to sustain the economy. The knowledge economy is ignored to stave off poverty and unemployment. It is observed that there prevails a wrong notion of modernity in the region. It consists of the possession of the high techs and to lead a luxurious life. The literacy rate in the region is deplorably low and it is the major hindrance to make the region progress on the parameters of the knowledge base economy. The era of Nasir in Egypt the Arab Nationalism was a hot selling slogan to inculcate the Arab pride in the people of the region but again it turned out to be the half hearted effort. In other words, “communities able to adjust economically to the transformation also proved highly assertive in regard to projecting their collective political and identity claims in a matter that is often interpreted in contemporary parlance as “ethnic-nationalism.”9 Some of the analysts are of the view that Israel illegal occupation of Arab land is also the main hindrance in the progress of the region. But again it reflects the fetishism of land as it was observed during the Ottoman Empire and this fetishism helps to understand that the region is suffering from the intellectual problems. Their obsession with the land suggests that the mentality of the land is still feudal. The women are the great victims of this mentality who are suppressed and are non entity in the region. There were certain secular movements in the region also. The Shah of Iran tried to westernized the country but the emphasis was on the western life style and again the spirit of western values was ignored i.e. democracy, reformation and renaissance. It was imposed on the people and lacked the local experience of the modernity. And to some analyst this imposition caused a great stir in the region because the people saw it as a threat to their local cultural identities and they strongly reacted against it. The western powers in the past supported dictators to crush the local movements and it alienated people from the main stream of politics and resultantly the west confronted the strong backlash for its wrong policies. (See Mirsepassi, 2000) Lewis observed that the secularism of the region offered the Ottoman and their 20th century successors a sense of modernity without renaissance and the states remained doctorial and dysfunctional. Except being paranoid no substantial efforts are addressed to come out of the mire of the orthodox way of living. “Although traditions rooted in Islamic influence much of the Middle East, a closer look reveals that a rich dichotomy colors the region.” (Wilcox,2004 pp 2)¹º 4 Lewis, Bernard.(2002) What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Responses. Phoenix, 5 Lewis, Bernard. (2002) What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Responses. Phoenix, 6 Lewis, Bernard. (2002) What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Responses. Phoenix 7 Sukru. M(2008) A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire. New Jersey: Princeton University Press 8 Viviano(2003) quoted from Wilcox(2004) A Middle East Primer for Students. American Forum for Global Education. 9 Blumi, Isa (2003)Beyond the Margin of the Empire: Searching the Limitations of Ottoman Rule in Yemen and Albania. The MIT Electronic Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol.3,Spring 2003. Retrieved on 7-1-2009. pp 18 10 Wilcox(2004) A Middle East Primer for Students. American Forum for Global Education. C- Describe and analyze the great power competition over Persia before 1907? After considering the Anglo-Russian Entente, discuss its effectiveness in keeping stability in the area. In the second half of 19th century the Russians and the British came close to meet head on. For hindered years Russia was expanding her territory east and south. The Britain came with all its strength to stop it since they feared that the ambitious Russia might devour India. The rivalry between the two powers commenced the Great Game, ranging from Europe to the Far East. On the border of India the Game led Britain into military adventure in Afghanistan and Tibet, at times causing a great disaster for the English. The Russia posed a great challenge to British India for over hundred years from the early 18th to the mid 19th century as Peter the Great is supposed to have said once that Russia should go for India. As the 19th century came closer the Russians moved slowly but steadily to the frontiers of India. “By 1850, the gap between the British and Russian Empires had narrowed to not much over 1000 miles, whereas, it had been 4000 miles in the early 18th century.”¹¹. As the years passed by the both of empires became interested in the territories which separated them and their concentration was focused on the buffer zones which were Persia, Afghanistan and Tibet. This competition between the two empires became known as “Great Game”. A term was coined by Lieutenant Arthur Conolly, a British officer of the 6th Bengal Native Light Cavalry. The Middle East became the main focus of the power competition. It was the great interest of the British to check Russian advances in the Eastern Mediterranean Turkey and Persia for it was the commercial and military route of the British. They were keen to control the Sultan of Turkey the territory through which ran the Suez Canal was under his control. On the other side the Russian were also interested to have their sway on the Sultan of Turkey for he was also the guardian of the Straights of Constantinople. In 1898 the Germans showed their interest in the Turkish Empire. The friendship between the two started when Germans proposed a railway track from Baghdad to Berlin which ultimately caused the fall of the empire since Turkey sided with Germany in the Great War. The German ambition prompted Russia to have an agreement with Britain. Anglo-Russian Entente of 1907 came in time, for oil was found in south Persia, it was the area which was bequeathed to Britain by Russia in the agreement. The Anglo-Russian Entente was signed on August 31, 1907 in St. Petersburg and it was signed by Alexander Izvolsky, the Foreign Minister of the Russian Empire and Britain Ambassador in Russia Arthur Nicolson. Though Russia and Britain fought the First World War as allies but their rivalries could not be subsided. After the war the rivalries began to revive in Persia. During the agreement the question arose between the two in the share of Persia but the fear Germany for the time being suppressed the concerns of the Russian, regarding Persia. But later on the skirmish came on the surface. Goldstein and McKercher (2003) are of the opinion that even before 1865 the British foreign policy aspired for international stability since it provided protection to her and to her trade pursuits. To achieve these ends the British diplomacy always seemed eager to maintain the balance of power in the world. So, by the entente of 1907 the Britain had the opportunity to keep other powers at bay from her interests. ¹² ¹¹ Retrieved on 7-1-2009. ¹² Goldstein, Erik. McKercher, B. J. C (2003) Power and Stability. Frank Cass & Co. Ltd. D. Identify 3 to 5 major problems faced by the Ottoman Empire in the 19th and early part of the 20th centuries. Describe the reforms of such people as Mahmet Ali and the Young Turks. To what extent were they successful in solving or alleviating the problems of the Ottoman Empire? To introduce modern reform in the Ottoman Empire the important steps were to establish Medical School in 1827 and the War College in 1834. Western type schools and Western languages caused a new crisis for the ruling dynasty. Hitherto the Palace played the role of institution and led every aspect of life in the society. Now the palace faced a great challenge by the above mentioned two aspects of Westernization. The Palace was outshined by the new officials graduating from the Westernized schools, speaking French. These graduates were not impressed by the backwardness of the Palace and it brought a breach in the loyalty of its subjects hitherto the Empire was enjoying from its people. The worst was with the advent of Tanzimat the palace indulged in the life of luxury so to meet the expanses it relied on borrowing from abroad. In 1854 because of heavy borrowing the expanses increased to a phenomenal scale. All the bowering money was spent on building palaces and to lead a life of comfort. Therefore, in 1875 there came a crash when the Ottoman government declared that it could only pay half of interests on the debts. At this juncture there was no alternative for the government but to mend its ways, which means getting the modern education for the dynasty and imposing strict limits on expenses. There was a second alternative to have limited monarchy and to allow parliament or bureaucracy to rule ultimately. But Abulhamit instead rejected all the alternatives and set a police state becoming the chief policemen. He tried to return the loans by giving certain state revenues to the European creditors and by collecting their own loan the creditors became state within the state. The Reforms of Mahmet Ali: Mahmet Ali , who started his career as low ranking army officer and was sent to Egypt to resist the invasion of Napoleon, became the governor of Egypt. He somehow managed to get significant powers and Egypt almost became an autonomous state under his control. He modernized his army and established schools and introduced irrigation projects.. He brought Egypt into the modern age by the construction of elaborate system of civil administration. The reforms introduced by Mehmet Ali actually hastened the foundation of the independent Egypt. The Young Turks: The young Turks came into power in 1908 which was the revival limited monarchy though later it proved a short lived idea. It is also called the period of power of the New Educated Man. In 1876 they were just in hundreds but now they were in thousands. They were all Turks though all of them were not ethnic Turks but they identified themselves as Turks. In other words they were Turkish nationalists. The Ottoman Empire being a multinational state could not sustain this new of wave of nationalism because it was an invitation for other nationalists to act the same. The Young Turks were mostly from the bureaucratic crops or from the army and they aspired for the bourgeois society which meant to create a capitalist class and they called themselves the member of Committee of Union and Progress ( CUP) . Because they dominated the army and the bureaucracy they challenged the Abdulhamit rule Rumelia and after a great bloodshed they proclaimed liberty in most of Rumilia on July 23rd, 1908. Abdulhamit had no other option but to decree election the next day. Through elections Young Turks were able to bring back constitutional regime in Rumelia. By the constitutional reforms the CUP members also became the member of the cabinet of Pasha. After the assassination of Mahomet Pasa on June 11, 1913 the young Turks assumed the office of the Grand vizir. The CUP had to face the challenges to limit their power and opposition force were keen to that it should not interfere in government affairs. The opposition was also critical of their compromise with Abdulhamit. An organized uprising was launched by the opposition when a prominent opposition journalist was assassinated, and it turned out to be a bloody mess. The government resigned and CUP fled to Rumelia. And the later events in the history paved way for Mustafa Kamal to hold control of the country. The regime introduced by the young Turks could hardly be called the democratic system of the government and they openly described themselves the “scared society”. After the March Revolution this attitude of young Turks became more prominent. In spite of their dismal record in the history the CUP era was comparatively an era of freedom for the people. As in the early period of Abdulhemit the people were not allowed to form even non-political associations but after 1908 the people had the opportunity to form associations and a daring group could also formed the political associations also. Then came the freedom of press. Before 1908 every word had to go through the censure of the government. The school syllables were revised which was a very important step taken by the Young Turks and it opened up the society. The reforms of Mehmet Ali were the beginning of the challenges to the decadent system of government of the Empire. Though the significance of the reforms was realized by the later rules but it was too late. Actually the reforms of Mehmet Ali and the struggle of the Young Turks proved to be a great dent in the solidarity of the Empire and to some extent were the cause of the demise of the empire. All the efforts and reforms posed questions on the efficacy of the government.¹³ ¹³ Professor Dr. Aksin Sina. The Place of Young Turks Revolution in Turkish History Retrieved on 8-1-2009 E. Did the people of the Middle East attempt to copy any western influences throughout the 19th and early part of the 20th centuries? If so, which ones, why, and what impact, if any, did they have? During 1839-1876, the period of reorganization, some important reforms were introduced to give the empire an outlook of a modern state. These reforms were an attempt to integrate non Muslims and non Turks into the society by increasing the civil liberties and they were granted the equal status all over the Empire. The prominent reforms were in the banking system and first paper bank note was issued in 1840 and finance system was reorganized on the French model. Reorganizing the political system a semi parliament was established which became a full fledge parliament in 1876. Moreover, it was for the first time that the non Muslims were allowed to become soldiers in 1856. After the death of Faud Pasha the reform movement had to face the budget deficit and internal ethnic discontent. The era of Abdulhamit also saw the process of modernization. The empire gradually came closer to Germany which was the leading supplier of the arms in the empire. The irony is that the reforms instead of consolidating the empire became the causes of its disintegration and reforms actually germinated ethnic and national strife. The later parliamentary reforms brought the Young Turks in the helm of affairs which weakened the control of the empire. References 1-Blumi, Isa (2003)Beyond the Margin of the Empire: Searching the Limitations of Ottoman Rule in Yemen and Albania. The MIT Electronic Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol.3,Spring 2003. Retrieved on 7-1-2009. pp 18 2-Goldstein, Erik. McKercher, B. J. C (2003) Power and Stability. Frank Cass & Co. Ltd. 3-Koppes, C.R. (1976). "Captain Mahan, General Gordon and the origin of the term "Middle East"". Middle East Studies 12: 95–98. 4-Lewis, Bernard. (2002) What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Responses. Phoenix, 5-Near East' is Mideast, Washington Explains, The New York Times (August 14, 1958). Professor Dr. Aksin Sina. The Place of Young Turks Revolution in Turkish History Retrieved on 8-1-2009 6-Shohat, Ella. Redrawing American Cartographies of Asia. City University of New York.. 7-Sukru. M(2008) A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire. New Jersey: Princeton University Press 8-Viviano(2003) quoted from Wilcox(2004) A Middle East Primer for Students. American Forum for Global Education. 9-Wilcox (2004) A Middle East Primer for Students. American Forum for Global Education. 10- Retrieved on 7-1-2009.   Read More