Lethal Repercussions of Appeasing Policies
Have today’s unparalleled terrorism and barbarism been created or it has been given the slow awakening kiss over decades?
Yes, the appalling atrocities and its declared and undeclared proponents itself indicate the enormity of the mentality disorders and ailments prevalent in the region. But deprivation, suppression, persecution or appeasement turned considerable number of youth into mere criminals?
Game of Words: thoughts on the usage of the term “Middle East”
Penned by Peter Beaumont, Gerald H. Blake, J. Malcolm Wagstaff, the work The Middle East: A Geographical Study states that the term “Middle East” may have originated in the 1850‘s in the British India Office. Nevertheless, even after the “end” of European colonialism of the area designated as the Middle East, the term remains ubiquitous in every aspect of our modern society. Although the term makes sense in the mind of the user, yet such a locution has been highly criticized as emanating from a Eurocentric conception of world geography and history. Thus, the term is seen as a relic of the colonial era, when categorizing the races, religion and people of this region within one particular rubric was characterized knowledge production that tended to justify the rule of the colonizing powers. Nevertheless, I argue that although a problem may reside due to a lack better term, the locution itself is not misleading as long as the user articulates it from a clearly defined pool of knowledge that acknowledges the particulars and diversity of the area. In other words, despite the human mind’s habit of constantly associating things with one another, hence ossifying certain categories of knowledge that are more easily grasped by it, it can be argued that as long as the “Middle East” is used in a way that clearly expresses the context of its usage, the term is not misleading at all. In this sense, the establishment of nation-states and clear-cut boundaries after the collapse of the European colonial rule (1950’s and 1960’s) has the propensity to spur this paradigm shift much required for a better understanding of the region.
Current borders of Middle East
ISIS: Then, There and Now
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria was born in a region known for its decades of strife, poverty and religious extremism. But was their creation inevitable? Was the Middle East always leading down the path to an era of beheadings and Islamic Caliphates? Or are outside reasons to blame for its creation? And what hope is there for the future?
May 11, 2004. The World is stunned to see a horrific video posted on a militant group’s propaganda website that shows the beheading of Nick Berg, a American freelance radio-tower repairman who went to Iraq and went missing in March. The group responsible was named “Jama’at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad” (Group of Monotheism and Jihad) and there path of destruction would become known to the world and the soldiers fighting in Iraq. This group would later come to be known as “Al-Qaeda in Iraq” after declaring allegiance to Osama Bin Laden a couple months later, and it would grow later into ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria). Its leader, Abu Musab Al-Zargawi, will become known as a leader of death and blood.
The Six-Day War between Political Miscalculations & Sheer Aggression
In his illustration of the crises preceding the June War 1967 – “The Six-Day War,” Sune Persson (2012) refers to the Egyptian prestige being tarnished after the setbacks in Yemen and in May Egypt’s countermeasures were carried out: army was ordered into the Sinai, which had been demilitarized since 1956, request was made for the evacuation of UN forces and a new blockade of the Gulf of Aqaba.
In addition to escalation of tensions on all Arab-Israeli fronts, further element featuring the context of the June War was underlined by Kissinger (1979), who perceived Soviet Union warning Egypt of an imminent Israeli attack on Syria setting in motion a fateful process comprising the above mentioned measures ordered by Nasser.
|Grand Strategy for the stability and economic development in the Middle East and Af-Pak region
The colonial geopolitical design of Middle East cannot deliver stability, democracy and prosperity due to its flawed structure. The western states, in particular the U.S.A and western European government, have been using their tax payers’ money in their fight against terrorism now for decades.
Transition to democracy has profoundly transformed many regions of the world in the second half of the last century. These regions include Europe, Latin American, Far East and Central Asian. Restoration of democracy and independence among many nations after the breakup of Soviet Union has played a vital role in renewal of commerce and economic progress in eastern European region. However, the authoritarian states in Middle East, especially the fanatical states of Iran and Pakistan are the main barriers to democracy and rule of law. They are the chief source of religious fundamentalism and cause of instability in Afghanistan.
Who Owns The Archives Of A Vanishing Iraqi Jewish World?
When U.S. troops entered the basement of Saddam Hussein’s secret police building in Baghdad a decade ago, they were looking for weapons of mass destruction. They didn’t find any.
But they did discover a trove of documents from what was once a thriving Jewish community in Baghdad. Those documents go on display beginning Friday in Washington at the National Archives.
This colorfully illustrated French and Hebrew Passover Haggadah was published in Vienna in 1930. Caption on the image: “Eating Matzah.” This restored document is part of an exhibit at the National Archives in Washington, D.C., that opens Nov. 8.
The big question now is who owns the documents: the U.S., the government of Iraq, or Iraqi Jewish exiles?
Three reasons for the Egypt-Russia rapprochement
In May 1958, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser started an 18-day state visit to Russia, a visit that officially marked a recalibration of Egyptian foreign policy away from the Western sphere, and toward the Soviet camp. Fifty-five years later, an Egyptian popular diplomatic delegation headed to Moscow in a visit that was described as fruitful and positive. The past is a prologue that can safely be applied to the current Egyptian-Russian relationship. In fact, many members of the delegation are known for their affection toward Russia. Actor Ezzat Al-Alayli spoke in a TV interview about the visit and how it rekindled past memories of his time in Russia in the sixties. Indeed, the sixties were the peak of this partnership, and Nasser’s tenure was marked by strong ties with the Russians —from military dependency to infrastructure projects, such as the Aswan high dam, educational missions and even tourism.
Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser takes his guest, Soviet Premier Nikita S. Khrushchev on a tour of the ancient Temple of Luxor following a visit to the Aswan Dam, May 21, 1964. (photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)
Struggle over Syria: Russia vs. United States?
The ruling elite of Syria find its root in Hafez Assad‘s coup détat on 1970, after several years of political struggle within the Baath party, between the political wing headed by Salah Jadid and the military wing headed by Hafez Assad, until 2000, when Bashar Assad succeeded his father (Dīb, 2011) for the moment of writing this research. Although the political power under the Baath rule continued under the mercy of secret services but ideology above all played its role too (Ajami, 2012). Baath promoted its ideology (Arabism) in a new language that was theoretically aiming to unify Arabs regardless of their sect or religion.
Until February 2012, the Syrian constitution of 1973 appointed Baath as the party that has the responsibility to lead both society and state thanks to the article eight of the constitution. The party members have priority in governmental, administration and educational missions. Besides, the regional leadership of Baath had the monopoly over nominating the only candidate for presidential referendum for almost forty years (Ziadeh, 2011). However, with the new constitution of 2012, the monopoly of Baath over the political arena has been theoretically abolished.
Syria has little recent history of mass unrest and rebellion. The Baathist government of Hafez al-Assad succeeded to effectively crush the Islamic oppositions – largely represented by the Muslim Brotherhood – through repression and dominance of state institutions (Stuart, 2011). But in 2011, taking advantage of the political climate in the Arab world, and in the aftermath of the so called ―Arab Spring, the Syrian oppositions managed to organize their masses and posed for the first time a real threat to the Baath leadership by calling to overthrow President Bashar Assad.
I‘m not going to characterize the nature of opposition movements in Syria, because there is a big debate and controversy over its description. Syrians themselves are divided among different views of what is the best solution for the economic, political and social future of Syria.