World War I was what set into motion the territories known as today’s Middle East. Whoever won the war, more specifically the British and the French, would carve out the Ottoman’s former land in the name of the Sykes Picot agreement. This agreement and peace conference would later have long-term effects on what is today’s Middle East.
World War II “dashed hopes of turning a quick profit from the newly discovered oil fields of the Middle East” (5). The U.S. and many other powers wanted the oil resources that lived in the Middle East during the spark of World War II. The U.S. also paid greater attention to the oil resources of the Persian Gulf, due to the fact that energy sources like oil could fall into the hands of the Soviet Union.
Zionist movement was a movement that focused on Jews “establishing the state of Israel” (6). It caused long-term conflict in the Middle East due to the Jews being persecuted and killed during the Holocaust. After the Holocaust, the world supported the Jews “establishing the state of Israel”, however, there were already Palestinian Arabs living there. The Palestinian Arabs felt that their land was being stolen from them, and this contributed Arab nationalism.
The U.S. decided that they needed to combat the Soviet Union during the said Cold War with the help of Israel located in the Middle East. The U.S. saw Israel as “a counterweight to the expanding Soviet influence in Egypt, Syria, and Iraq” (9). Therefore, the U.S. gave Israel weapons if they helped them defeat the Soviet Union.
As result from Israel winning the Six-Day War, their land mass tripled. They gained the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Golan Heights. Israel also became the dominant military force.
Arab states aimed their “oil weapons” specifically at the United States because they saw the United States as an enemy since they were aiding Israel, Arabs actual enemy. They were trying to “emphasize to the United States that it would have to do more for the Arab side in the Arab-Israeli conflict if it wanted to minimize Soviet influence in the region” (11). “By the end of 1973, world oil production had fallen about 9 percent” (11). This led to an increase in unemployment and inflation in the United States.
The October War had “laid the groundwork for the first steps toward peace” (12). Arabs’ successes on the battlefield led to their pride being restored and initiatives being set into place for peace in the way of the Camp David Accords (12). America helped in bringing together both leaders from Egypt and Israel to form this peace agreement.
The Islamist Revolution in Iran seemed like a setback for U.S. interests in the Middle East due to it being uncertain if the U.S. and other countries would gain access to the oil in the Persian Gulf and other parts since it was being under attack.
The United States got involved in the war because they saw that it was escalating and wanted to try to negotiate peace.
President Bush had to consider if he should attack Iraq and if so he had to do it quickly. He also felt that the coalition of nations he assembled would not be together or hold for a longer time. President Bush also had to think about Saddam Hussein influence on the Arab world and if it could backfire on the United States.
“The Middle East” Packet Part II
America’s growing military presence in the Middle East generated controversy among Arabs and Americans because their presence threatens and disturbs Arabs’ way of life, but at the same time can help broker a peace agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians. America's growing military presence can also turn Palestinians against America, due to the fact that the U.S. is aiding Israel, their enemy, with weapons.
Political Islam’s growth has changed the U.S. role in the Middle East due to it standing against all of what America believes in. It threatens U.S. interests causing the U.S. to have to “balance [its] principles and security interests” (22).
The United States faces challenges with the violence and instability that continues in Iraq today. “The violence from local militias, insurgents, and terrorist groups make providing public safety, electricity, water, and other basic services extremely difficult” (26). There is also a secular division in Iraq that prevents anything from being solved, along with Iraq have a struggling economy. This all affects the stability of the new Iraqi government that the United States helped to put in place.
The United States wants to contain Iran due to the belief that Iran “has a well-established program to develop nuclear weapons” that could be targeted against the United States (26).
In my opinion, I do not believe that the Arab-Israeli conflict is resolvable because it has gone on for so long. Each side looks like they do not want to compromise with the other, and because of that, this conflict can not be resolved.
“The Middle East” Packet Part III
The Iraq War of 2003 created an increase in tensions between the United States and other countries in the Middle East. Many countries in the Middle East no longer wanted U.S. involvement in their regions. This forced many Iraqis to “join insurgent groups and fight against the U.S. occupation” (25). The relations between these countries and the United States also later “hindered international cooperation on other issues” (25).
Iran remains a security concern for the United States due to Iran wanting to create nuclear weapons. The United States feels as though the nuclear weapons that Iran wants to create could be used for the wrong reasons. However, Iran states that it would only be used for “peaceful purposes” and that it is in their right to create these weapons.
In my opinion, A two-state solution for Palestinians and Israelis is not possible. I believe it is not possible because the tensions between both Palestinians and Israelis have been so high for so long. I do not think the two could live peacefully as two distinct states with the bad blood they have and how close they would continue to live next to one another. I also do not believe there is a way to equally divide up all the land so that both get equally fertile land.
The Arab Spring affected the U.S. policy in that region through whether or not the U.S. should still try to promote democracy and human rights in those regions even when their U.S. interests could be held, hostage. It also affected the United States overall involvement in the politics of the Middle East.
“The Arab-Israeli Conflicts: A Conflict Resolution Perspective”
The first myth stated is, “The Middle East Conflict is thousands of years old” (157). This is untrue because it is reported that “the current conflict is approximately sixty years old, and dates to the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and the decades of European Jewish immigration that preceded it” (157). The second myth stated is, “Religious hatred is the reason for the conflict” (158). This is inaccurate due to that the real reason for the conflict is over who should get the land. However, this conflict over land comes from each group's specific use of religion to “achieve political advantage and achieve support for their position” (158). The third myth stated is, “Attempts to end the conflicts are pointless” (159). This is inaccurate due to there having been peace treaties made by both Israel between Egypt and Jordan, and also meetings were “taken place between Israeli and Palestinian officials, academics, and representatives” (159).
1. The media shapes the public’s view of the conflicts in the Middle East by telling myths that can steer the public’s perception to one side or the other.
2. Religion plays a role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through religion tying both groups to the land that each believes they have claims to. With both have competing claims to the land, their extreme dislike for the other grows along with their very own nationalism.
3. The relationship between Israel and its Arab neighbors have changed in the last sixty years due to there being made peace treaties, there has been recognition of both the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and the state of Israel on both sides, as well as a dozen meeting where each side is in attendance to discuss solutions to the conflicts.
4. There are some possible compromises on the issues of territory, refugees, and Jerusalem. However, these compromises have not satisfied both Israel and the Palestinians. For example, both have agreed on creating a Palestinian state, but have not agreed on what exact regions this Palestinian state would have. Also, there has been disagreements on who should have the West Banks.
5. Some positive impacts of the Oslo Accords, is that the Oslo Accords “included mutual recognition between the two parties” (171). The Oslo Accords also put into effect Israel giving up part of its territories of the West Banks and Gaza Strip to the Palestinian government. There were also some negative impacts of the Oslo Accords. The Oslo Accords caused tension to increase between both sides due to neither of them being able “to move from the interim Oslo Agreement into successful final status talks” (171, 173). The Accords, in the end, “deepened the distrust between the Israelis and the Palestinians at both the governmental and the societal level” (173).
6. The unilateral approaches were temporary fixes, more like band-aid measures. It did not solve the root of the problem. Therefore, all the unilateral approaches did not completely solves or permanently decrease the tensions on both sides. The tensions, on the contrary, increased.
7. International Communities should not take sides on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, because that only fuels the tensions between the two groups. They should instead support both sides in helping to resolve the conflicts and tensions. International Communities should not directly involve themselves in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, because that can be seen as meddling, which again would solve nothing.
“The Roots of the Muslim Rage” by Bernard Lewis
The evolving relationship between the West and Muslim societies are complicated. Muslim societies see the West as a threat to their own culture, sense of self, religion, and values. They are threatened by the West’s way of life, specifically their secularism. Muslim societies also fear the imposing Western values on their societies. However, some Muslim societies do look upon the West in amazement of their successes, freedom, and wealth.
Muslims and Americanism’s (West) systems have always been rivals whether historically or today. Due to these rivalries, Muslims have faced many defeats which are responsible for their feelings of anti-Americanism in Muslim societies. These defeats range from their “loss of domination in the world, to the advancing power . . . the West” to their own “authority being undermin[ed] in [their] own country, through an invasion of foreign ideas and laws and ways of life . . .” (49). Their mastery was also challenged in their own house (49). All of these defeats are the reasons as to why Muslim societies have experienced feelings of hostility, humiliation, and anti-Americanism.
The Muslim World has adopted Western ideas like “political freedom, with the associated notions and practices of representation, election, and constitutional government” (60). They have also adopted “the form and style of male (and to a much lesser extent female) clothing, notably in the military” (60). Another thing they have adopted is Westernized weapons, like tanks, guns, and planes.
The segments in the article that are still relevant today is the part that mentions how we should attain a better appreciation of other cultures. With that in mind, we can only hope they do the same. In this way, all cultures should respect one another even if they oppose what they other stands for. They is relevant today, because we can apply this to when we interact with all kinds of different cultures living in today’s world.