Sources of Conflict in the Middle East: Borders or Stratified Identities?

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 1, 85 - 113, 13.03.2018

Kürşad Turan

https://doi.org/10.17134/khosbd.405246

Öz

Abstract

 

Since the end of Ottoman control, Middle
East has experienced a large number of conflicts. The arrangements made at the
end of World War I are often blamed for these conflicts. Arbitrarily drawn
borders and the creation of influence zones between Great Britain and France
without paying attention to religious and ethnic divisions present in the
region are seen at the source of today’s conflicts. Arangements such as the
Bunsen Committee report, Sykes-Picot agreement, and Hussein-McMahon
correspondence shaped the region after the war, but none of these were
successfully implemented due to changing circumstances, and their contradicting
nature. This study argues that even though these constituted the first step in
the creation of the modern Middle East, the real cause of today’s conflicts lie
in the creation of a stratified politicized identity system that emerged
through stages over the past century. These stages were marked by the conflicts
between Arab nationalism and nation state identities; the politicization of
sectarianism; and finally the emergence of ethnicity in politics.

 Keywords: Middle East, conflict, Sykes-Picot agreement, Arab nationalism,
sectarianism, ethnicity.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Middle East, conflict, Skyes-Picot agreement, Arab nationalism, sectarianism, ethnicity

Sources of Conflict in the Middle East: Borders or Stratified Identities?

Öz

Abstract

 

Since the end of Ottoman control, Middle
East has experienced a large number of conflicts. The arrangements made at the
end of World War I are often blamed for these conflicts. Arbitrarily drawn
borders and the creation of influence zones between Great Britain and France
without paying attention to religious and ethnic divisions present in the
region are seen at the source of today’s conflicts. Arangements such as the
Bunsen Committee report, Sykes-Picot agreement, and Hussein-McMahon
correspondence shaped the region after the war, but none of these were
successfully implemented due to changing circumstances, and their contradicting
nature. This study argues that even though these constituted the first step in
the creation of the modern Middle East, the real cause of today’s conflicts lie
in the creation of a stratified politicized identity system that emerged
through stages over the past century. These stages were marked by the conflicts
between Arab nationalism and nation state identities; the politicization of
sectarianism; and finally the emergence of ethnicity in politics.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Middle East, conflict, Sykes-Picot agreement, Arab nationalism, sectarianism, ethnicity

Kaynakça

• References
• Books
• Isaiah Friedman, The Question of Palestine, 1914-1918 (London, 1973)
• Articles
• Aaron S. Klieman, “Britain’s War Aims in the Middle East,” Journal of Contemporary History, 3 (3), July 1968, 237-251.
• Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME), “The MaMahon-Hussein Correspondence,” Factsheet series No. 140, October 2011 (29.03.2016).
• Ernest Dawn, “The Formation of Pan-Arab Ideology in the Interwar Years,” International Journal of Middle East Studies, 20 (1), February 1988, 67-91. Isaiah Friedman, “The McMahon-Hussein Correspondence and the Qustion of Palestine,” Journal of Contemporary History, 5 (2), 1970, pp. 83-122.
• Mahmoud Haddad, “Arab Religious Nationalism in te Colonial Era: Rereading Rashid Rida's Ideas on the Caliphate,” Journal of the American Oriental Society, 117 (2), April-June 1997, pp. 253-277.
• Mark Levene, “The Balfour Declaration: A Case of Mistaken Identity,” The English Historical Review, 107 (422), January 1992, pp. 54-77.
• Mehdi Mozaffari, “What Is Islamism? History and Definition of a Concept,” Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions, 8 (1), 2007, pp. 17-33.
• Nader Hashemi, “Toward a Political Theory of Sectarianism in the Middle East: The Salience of Authoritarianism over Theology,” Journal of Islamic and Muslim Studies, 1 (1), 2016, pp. 65-76.
• Steven L. Foster, “The Historical Implications of Defining Sovereignty in the Middle East, 19.01.2016 (29.03.2016).
• William I. Shorrock, “The Origin of the French Mandate in Syria and Lebanon: The Railroad Question, 1901-1914,” International Journal of Middle East Studies, 1 (2), April 1970, 133-153.
• Internet Sources
• Adel Suleiman, “Will the Sykes-Picot Agreement Collapse?” Middle East Monitor 21.01.2016, https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/ middle-east/23471-will-the-sykes-picot-agreement-collapse (27.03.2016).
• News
• Tarek Osman, “Why Border Lines Drawn with a Ruler in WWI Still Rock the Middle East,” BBC News, 14 December 2013 (26.07.2016).