Why is the West, and America in particular, so disliked, by so many in the Middle East (ME)? Constant meddling since oil was first discovered in large quantities has a lot to do with it.
[Giving China a rest this week as I think we’ve had rather enough of it of late!]
Over the Christmas break I read ‘The Silk Roads: A New History of the World’ by Mr. Peter Frankopan, a Senior Research Fellow at Worcester College, Oxford and it’s a great primer on why the ME is the muddle we see today.
To give the briefest of summaries: unequal treaties signed initially with Iran by my countrymen (the Brits) and then followed up with more of the same throughout the region by other ‘Western’ powers is the root cause of a lack of trust in the West in the region.
Then, arbitrary land carve ups, support for despotic regimes (the Shah in Iran then, Saudi Arabia now?) acting as provocateurs of conflict (remember who backed Saddam initially?) and most recently as an unprovoked belligerent invading sovereign states; the West has a lot to answer for in the bad behavior stakes in this part of the world.
Recently into this toxic cocktail we see a new ingredient, the rise of ISIS. How are we to understand this group and what should be done to contain their abhorrent regime?
This week I want to highlight one of the more thoughtful pieces I’ve found on this subject and it’s an article written for the journal Foreign Affairs by Mr. Stephen M. Walt, the Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School.
[You can find the full read here ISIS as Revolutionary State]
In this piece Professor Walt says we’ve seen versions of this movie before if we understand ISIS as a revolution. Be it France, Russia, China, Cuba, Cambodia or Iran revolutions conform to some well established patterns that are visible in ISIS today.
The good news is revolutions in small countries usually remain in their locale and even big revolutions only encourage others but are not directly contagious. China is not today ruled from Moscow and America is not directed from Paris.
Further good news is that ISIS is tiny. It’s territory may be the size of the UK but almost all of it is uninhabitable desert. It’s annual GDP is around the same size as that of Barbados and it’s annual income of c. U$500m is a tenth of the annual budget of Harvard University.
What’s the best policy to deal with it? Encourage border nations to contain it and disrupt its supply lines (it is after all landlocked) and wait for it to either collapse or moderate under the weight of its own contradictions.
What would be the dumbest thing to do? Support America in leading a coalition to engage in direct hostility with the group. This would merely radicalize supporters, convince moderate Islamists to lend support, stiffen the resolve of the regime and allow neighbors to shun their obligations.
Unsatisfying and frustrating but the lessons from history are clear.
Would anybody who knows him be kind enough to forward the article to ISIS’ most energetic recruiting agent currently, Mr. Donald Trump*?
Happy Sunday
[*This, direct from The Donald, from a Fort Dodge rally in Iowa last November, “..I would bomb the s— out of ’em. I would just bomb those suckers. That’s right. I’d blow up the pipes. … I’d blow up every single inch. There would be nothing left. And you know what, you’ll get Exxon to come in there and in two months, you ever see these guys, how good they are, the great oil companies? They’ll rebuild that sucker, brand new — it’ll be beautiful.” Between Mr. Trump and ISIS I don’t know who’s more scary? Probably the former.]