In an increasingly globalised world, more and more people are living in cities (at least 54%) and this is likely to increase to 66% by 2050 (UN, 2014). Urban study, therefore, is crucial, and an ever changing discipline. There is much to be known about urban geography in the Middle East, but hard to gauge is the relative importance of each area of focus to the discipline. Geography has many definitions, but is predominantly concerned with space, place and the environment (Matthews and Herbert, 2008) and its aim “is nothing less than an understanding of the vast interacting system comprising all humanity and its natural environment on the surface of the Earth” (Ackerman, 1963 cited in Matthews and Herbert, 2008). While there is not a global consensus on the countries which comprise the Middle East (Johannsen, 2006 cited in Özalp, 2011), it is broadly defined as the “region from Ethiopia in the south, Turkey in the north, Afghanistan and Pakistan in the east to Morocco in the west” (Özalp, 2011: 9).
Studying cities in the Middle East demonstrates clearly the uneven nature of the world today, and the way that the shadows of colonialism hover over the 21st century (Al Sayyad, 2013 and Neep, 2015). This is a fundamental lesson to be learnt. Is Western intervention in the Middle East for reasons other than to fight terror and help build democratic societies? Also of importance is the way in which globalisation links cities to the wider world, and whether this is primarily causing greater oneness or the celebration of city diversity. In this essay, importance will be viewed as that which has most significance and resulting impact for society. Inequality in urban areas will be weighed against a movement towards global unity which begins in cities.
Colonialism’s early hold on the Middle East was evidenced in the drawing of its boundaries in the first two decades of the twentieth century by outside powers (the Syke-Picot agreement of 1916 and San Remo meeting in 1920). There didn’t appear to be any real regard for pre-existing conditions, and like other attempted cartographic solutions to political issues, “they simply prolong the life of the troublesome equation of identity and geography” (Neep, 2015: n.p.). The identity and condition of a city is very much tied up with its national boundaries, and this piece of history highlights the unequal nature of the global scene around 100 years ago, that remains today.
The name of the region the ‘Middle East’, provokes Nezar Al Sayyad to ask the question: “middle of what, and east of where?” (2013: n.p.). Highlighted here is a colonial legacy (or that which is current) that has been used continually up until the present day, perhaps because the people for whom it was invented have themselves adopted it (Al Sayyad, 2013).
For cities, developmentalism saw traditional cultural practices as a barrier to progress and therefore anything that didn’t fit in with the outside idea of modernity had to be developed. Jennifer Robinson (2011) argues that there has been scarce comparison between wealthy and poorer cities and that developed urban spaces have been exalted as the model, almost ignoring the good found in more impoverished cities (Robinson, 2011). The inequality here is obvious, and with many cities in the Middle East region falling into the medium or low development categories, their study has often been neglected (an inequality in itself) (Human Development Index, 2015).
Foucault saw that colonialism has presented the West with opportunities to bring back new and improved ways of operating, that were tried overseas. ‘Boomerang effects’, as he called them, were ways in which the West imposed colonialism on itself. Military techniques used in cities in less developed nations have been exported back to western nations and used for increasing security. This military urbanism, which protects bases and prisons in a city such as Baghdad, has been used to protect gated communities and important financial institutions in the West. The security economy has ballooned: “growth rates are between 5 and 12% per year” (Graham, 2013). Evidence here seems to show less of an unequal world (though this is still the case) and more of the urban uniformity produced by globalisation, which has varying expressions across the development divide.
The 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States sparked a new military era, predominantly of war on terror, where “night fell on a different world” (Bush, 2001 cited in Holloway, 2008: 4). The attacks were the likely result of pre-conditions, and the events themselves were an important marker on a continuous road (Holloway, 2008). There has been a general feeling since that society, and cities in particular, is in need of defending, and that terror must be detected and defeated wherever it is found. The ‘everywhere war’ that the United States is fighting means the borders of warfare are blurred, and there seems to be no logical end to intervention (Gregory, 2011). If anywhere can be a battle space at any time, then it seems globalisation and advancing technology are causing nations and urban areas to become more uniform.
Simon Dalby (2007) wrote on Thomas Barnett’s ‘The Pentagon’s New Map’ (2004), where Barnett argued that a globalized core exists, containing the majority of the world. Military intervention, under this view, is a way of bringing freedom to those outside, inviting them in, “rather than an extension of American rule” (Dalby, 2007: 297). This freedom is defined as individuals being able to lead that lives that they desire, with peace as the ultimate goal. War, therefore, is not merely a form of control but the importing of “all aspects of social life” (Dalby, 2007). Cities, as hotbeds of culture, are subject to this at any time in this increasingly globalised world where the US exports, with force, its absolute societal code.
Counterinsurgency in the Middle East, on the part of the US and its allies, has triggered an increase in insurgency in the region’s cities. Many in Middle Eastern cities are dissatisfied and feel powerless to change the status quo on a local level by peaceful means (Coward, 2015 and Graham, 2006). The US intervention in Iraq, for example, is on their part one of liberation and assisting the country to stabilise and build a lasting, democratic system of government. Iraqis, however, often see the Americans as yet another regime, just of a different kind, that they simply cannot rely on. Occupation fuels the division of a city like Baghdad (Scranton, 2007). Where intervention fails, division increases and inequality becomes all the more apparent. If a country like Iraq can’t be ‘helped’ into ‘freedom’, it is in a worse state than perhaps anyone thought. Instead of direct action, Sauvagnargues (1976) proposes a “moral contribution” by outside powers in the case of Lebanon, but that ultimately Lebanon is to provide its own solution (Fregonese, 2009).
Many view outside intervention in Middle East conflict as unhelpful due to inherent assumptions that simply lack truth. Priya Satia (2014) argues that current bombing of parts of the Middle East by US military is grounded in the ‘success’ of the British bombing campaigns of Iraq after the First World War. The notion that the Middle East is hard to map and gain intelligence, and that people are untrustworthy encouraged aerial dominance. This idea held to this day in the minds of Western officials. The US use drones to monitor various parts of the region, and strikes are frequently carried out by the US Air Force and the CIA. Errors appear to be less destructive when one views a region as deceptive, and all military aged men are seen as potential combatants, meaning civilian casualty numbers are much reduced in official figures (Satia, 2014). Misconceptions about cities and populations highlights great inequality, and troubled urban areas are far less likely to want to adopt Western-imposed societal systems if they are brought with great firepower and cultural misunderstanding. Many find they were better off under the previous regime than with direct foreign military intervention (Coward, 2015).
Major cities have often been seen as inherently dangerous. Attacks, both from the air and from ground level, have annihilated cities in recent years. Again, urban inequality is highlighted here as the haves exert control over the have nots (while the haves continue to build their own cities) (Graham, 2004). The global war on terror, or the ‘everywhere war’ (Gregory, 2011), has been the role of the US and its allies, as lone superpower in the twenty first century. The aim hasn’t, one can argue, been uniformity, but the maintaining of their global dominance and the quashing of all which stands in opposition. Rather than trying to rebuild, there are many examples of ‘urbicide’, the total levelling of a city, and where there has been little intention of a rebuild of both infrastructure and society (Graham, 2004, Abujidi & Verschure, 2006 and Fregonese, 2009).
An Israeli Defense Force operation in 2002 resulted in the severe damaging of 80% of the buildings in the city of Nablus (Palestinian town) and caused a local student to remark that “we have forgotten normal”. Symbols of identity and power have been targeted, and as has any notion that the Palestinians have a right to return. This is achieved only through the dehumanising of the target and echoes the colonialism of the past. (Abujidi and Verschure, 2006).
To conclude, the most important thing that geographers can learn from studying cities in the Middle East is that urban spaces are inherently unequal, and that there are large disparities between them. The history of the Middle East is heavily tarnished by colonialism and an Orientalist perspective that has been adopted, to an extent, by the local peoples. Cities in the region have rarely been used in comparative study, deemed as underdeveloped and essentially containing little that can benefit urban geography. Counterinsurgency has been done with too little thought and with a strong sense of western superiority. Sadly, this has often involved urbicide, and triggered yet more insurgency, which increasingly haunts us today. On the other hand, there is evidence to suggest an extent of uniformity. ‘Boomerang effects’ demonstrate that practices used and developed by westerners in the Middle East have been brought back home to ‘benefit’ our urban spaces. This ties in closely with the notion that urban spaces are in constant need of defending, as surveillance and security have brought military urbanism back to the West. Additionally, urban warfare on the part of the US, the ‘world police’, is argued to ultimately be cultural exportation: the desire for democratic society across the Middle East. The region today teaches us more about inequality both internally and in its global comparison than it does uniformity, but there is hope that this can change.